Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14957 (JHR)

NANKA SEKH ALIAS SAMIM SEKH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./3388/2024 · 2025-02-11

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3388 of 2024 ------ 1. Nanka Sekh @ Samim Sekh, aged about 33 son of Safruddin Sekh, resident of Village-Dorhi, P.O.-Madhupur, P.S.-Madhupur, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand). 2. Kallu Sekh, aged about-45 years son of Late Makbul Sekh, resident of Village-Dorhi, P.O.-Madhupur, P.S.-Madhupur, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand). 3. Jhasku Sekh, aged about-63 years, son of Late Turawali Sekh, resident of Village-Dorhi, P.O.-Madhupur, P.S.-Madhupur, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand). 4. Anwar Sekh @ Bokla Sekh, aged about-43 years, S/o Late Gani Sek, resident of village-Dorhi, P.O.-Madhupur, P.S.-Madhupur, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand). 5. Abul Sekh, aged about-53 years, son of Makbul Sekh, resident of village-Dorhi, P.O.-Madhupur, P.S.-Madhupur, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand). 6. Charka Sekh, aged about-47 years, son of Makbul Sekh, resident of village-Dorhi, P.O.-Madhupur, P.S.-Madhupur, District- Deoghar (Jharkhand). .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Kr. Jha, Advocate : Mr. Ranjan Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Subodh Kr. Dubey, Addl.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Arvind Kr. Choudhary, Advocate ------ Order No.09 Dated- 11/02/2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Margomunda P.S. Case No.18 of 2024 instituted under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 448, 452, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners, in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons attempted to murder the informant and her family members and caused simple injuries to them. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is next submitted that from the side of the petitioners for the self-same occurrence, the Margomunda P.S. Case No.20 of 2024 was instituted after a day of the occurrence. It is next submitted that the informant party was the aggressor party and the petitioners were busy in treatment of their injured persons; hence some time was consumed before Lodging the First Information Report. It is next submitted that the petitioners have no intention to kill anybody. It is also submitted that the petitioners undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or any of her family members in any manner during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners undertake to co-operate with the investigation of the case and to furnish sufficient security including cash security. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners. Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within six weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on depositing Rs.10,000/- each as cash security and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned .J.M.-1st Class, Madhupur (Deoghar) in connection with Margomunda P.S. Case No.18 of 2024 with the condition that they will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish their mobile numbers and photocopy of the Aadhar Cards with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the pendency of the case and they will not annoy or disturb the informant or any of her family members in any manner during the pendency of the case and further conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Abhiraj/