Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12366 (JHR)

TARIF ANSARI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./4156/2025 · 2025-06-13

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2025:JHHC:15483 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 4156 of 2025 ------ Tarif Ansari, aged about 33 years, son of Aftab Ansari, resident of Village-Kokdoro, P.O.-Kokdoro, P.S.-Pithoria, Dist.-Ranchi … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sudhir Kr. Mahto, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate ------ Order No.02 Dated- 13.06.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Pithoria P.S. Case No.46 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 420/467/468/471/506/120B of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in conspiracy with the co-accused person sold the land in question which has already been sold out in favour of another and the petitioner was witness of a sale deed executed in favour of the informant by co- accused-Sajjauddin Ansari. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the main allegation is against Sajjauddin Ansari. It is next submitted that there is no allegation of entrustment of any money to the petitioner and there is no dispute regarding the identity of the executant of the sale deed in favour of the petitioner. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 12.03.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. Ranchi, in connection with Pithoria P.S. Case No.46 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/