2025:JHHC:18860 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2921 of 2025 ---- 1. Rajan Singh @ Rajan S/o Parsuram Singh, resident of Qr. No.A-229, Sector 4, PO PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 2. Prashant Kumar @ Prashant Singh S/o Parsuram Singh, resident of Qr. No. A-229, Sector 4, PO PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi. …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ---- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ---- For the Petitioners : Mr. Shekhar Prasad Sinha, Advocate Mr. Satyam Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Nikhilesh Kumar Chatterjee, Advocate ---- 4/ 11.07.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the Informant. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Lower Bazar Police Station Case No.94 of 2025, registered for offences alleged under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023, pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ranchi. 3. As per the First Information Report, it is alleged that on 05.04.2025 at about 09.30 a.m. Prashant Singh, Rajan Singh and Bunty came to the house of the informant and took her son Kunal Kumar with them, but he did not return at night. After search, it came to be known that the dead body of the son of the informant is lying inside the boundary of Sadar Hospital in an unattended manner. It has also been alleged that earlier also Sunil Kumar Pal, Pramod Kumar Pal, Masuk Ali etc. had threatened the informant and her family of life and property. Informant has alleged that these persons were trying to grab the land of the informant. Informant has also mentioned that earlier also she had lodged Hindpiri Police Station Case No.90 of 2024. She has expressed suspicion that said Sunil Kumar Pal, Pramod Kumar Pal and Masuk Ali under a conspiracy have killed the son of the informant and have thrown the dead body inside the Sadar Hospital. 2025:JHHC:18860 -: 2 :- 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the cause of death as opined by the doctor in the postmortem report is electrocution and its complications. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the deceased along with Bunty, Guddu Kumar Ram were doing the work of lighting and decoration and in course thereof, the deceased fell down due to electrocution, resulting in injury of abrasion, whereafter the deceased was taken to the hospital. He submits that in course of investigation all the witnesses have stated that the petitioners and others who were present there, had tried to save the deceased to the best of their ability, but due to electrocution, he died. He further submits that the petitioners are residents of Dhurwa and not Hindpiri and they do not have any connections with the three persons, namely, Sunil Kumar Pal, Pramod Kumar Pal and Masuk Ali, whom the informant has named in the First Information Report to be eyeing on the lands of the informant. 5. Learned APP appearing for the state opposes the prayer of the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail. He submits that the petitioners are not entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail. He further submits that the allegations are direct and serious in nature. 6. After hearing the parties and after going through the records, I find that the death was caused due to electrocution and the same has also been opined by the doctor in the postmortem report. The informant also has stated in course of investigation that the deceased used to do electric works. Independent witnesses examined in course of investigation at paragraph 33, 63 and 64 of the case diary have also corroborated the fact of electric shock suffered by the deceased. Further, there is reference of CCTV footage of the incident, in the Case Diary. The recording made therein prima facie does not suggest any act of assault. Considering these facts, I am inclined to allow this anticipatory bail application. The petitioners, named above, are directed to surrender before the Court below within four weeks from today and in the event of their surrender and/or arrest, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ranchi in connection with Lower Bazar Police Station Case No.94 of 2025, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be close relative of the respective petitioners and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his own name or in 2025:JHHC:18860 -: 3 :- the name of his ancestors in which he is having share and to that effect, he has to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his share in the property. It is further directed that the petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer once in every 15 days and shall cooperate in the investigation of the case till submission of the chargesheet. 7. This anticipatory bail application is, accordingly, allowed. (Ananda Sen, J.) Kumar/Cp-03