BIJAY HARI ALIAS BIJOY HARI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
A.B.A./4650/2025 · 2025-08-25
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 14815 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 14815 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
( 2025:JHHC:25057 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 4650 of 2025
Bijay Hari @ Bijoy Hari, Age 44 years, son of late Chamtu Hari, resident of Kanke Road, Gandhinagar, P.O. and P.S. Gonda, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand ...... … Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party
--------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner
:Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate
Ms. Aayushi Aman, Advocate For the State : Mr. Govind Ray Karan, A.P.P.
06/ 25.08.2025: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Giridih (T) P.S. Case No. 144/2024, registered under sections 409, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506, 34 of the I.P.C. pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Giridih.
3.
Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that based on an agreement it was agreed between the informant and Sidharth Traders to supply the coal. He submits that the petitioner has not received any amount and all the transactions have been made in the account of Sujit Kumar Gope which has come in the case diary. He submits that Sujit Kumar Gope has already been apprehended by the police. He further submits that the matter is arising out of an agreement and completely civil in nature. He submits that in the complaint itself it has been disclosed that for some time the business was going on however later on certain benefits have not been provided to the complainant. He submits that the said complaint has been converted into F.I.R. pursuant to order of the learned court. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioner may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail.
( 2025:JHHC:25057 )
4.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that there is allegation of transaction of Rs. 74,00,000/- for that complaint case has been filed. However, on query, he fairly submits that in paras 42 and 46 of the case diary it has come that the amount in question has been transferred in the account of Sujit Kumar Gope.
5.
Learned counsel for the informant oppose the prayer however he has not been able to rebut the materials which has come in paras 42 and 46 of the case diary during investigation.
5.
In view of above and considering that the entire transaction has been made in the account of said Sujit Kumar Gope who is accused no.1 which has come in paras 42 and 46 of the case diary and the matter is arising out of an agreement, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the above named, petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of his surrender / arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Giridih, in connection with Giridih (T) P.S. Case No. 144/2024, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S, 2023.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-