Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11073 (JHR)

MUKESH KUMAR YADAV ALLIAS MUKESH KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./2421/2025 · 2025-04-21

Sri Ananda Sen

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:11909 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.2421 of 2025 ------ 1. Mukesh Kumar Yadav @ Mukesh Kumar 2. Dhananjay Kumar Yadav @ Dhananjay Yadav ... ... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand. ... ... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P. ----- 02/ 21.04.2025 This Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023, has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Chhatarpur P.S. Case No.183 of 2024, for offences under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The case is presently pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class at Palamu. 2. Heard the parties at length. 3. Learned counsel representing the petitioners submits that if the petitioners had an intention to assault the victim, they could have assaulted much prior to the occurrence as this victim travelled along with them and there is no allegation that until Chhotu and Pradip came, they assaulted him. 4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. 5. From the impugned order, I find that these two petitioners had taken the victim along with them and near a bridge when Chhotu and Pradip came, it is first Chhotu and Pradip who assaulted then these petitioners also assaulted, as there was some 2025:JHHC:11909 2 dispute in respect of money transaction between them. The victim has stated that along with Chhotu and Pradip, these two petitioners also assaulted. The injuries are grievous i.e. multiple fracture of rib, right clavicle, vertebrae. CT Scan of brain shows that the injured had sustained fracture of right maxillary sinus, fracture wall of right orbit, right temporal bone, zygomatic area etc., caused by hard and blunt object. 6. Considering the aforesaid allegation, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application is dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Prashant. Cp-3