PRINCE TIWARI ALIAS PRINCE KUMAR TIWARI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
A.B.A./5321/2024 · 2025-04-24
Sri Ananda Sen
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 20993 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 20993 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:JHHC:12299 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5321 of 2024 Prince Tiwari @ Prince Kumar Tiwari, son of Ajay Tiwari, resident of village Bharatiya, Ward No. 2, P.O and P.S. Garhwa, District- Garhwa. ..Petitioner(s).
Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party(s). ------
CORAM :
SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Suraj Deo Munda, A.P.P. …..... 05/24.04.2025 This is an application filed by the petitioner praying for grant of anticipatory bail in terms of Sections 482 and 484 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, as the petitioner has been allegedly implicated in a criminal case registered under Section(s) 147, 149, 384, 341, 325 IPC in connection with Garhwa P.S. Case No. 294 of 2023, pending in the Court of learned CJM, Garhwa. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and had gone through the documents, annexed along with this application. Opportunity was given to the State to oppose the bail, which the State availed and opposed. There is allegation that due to accident of the tractor of the informant, one person got injured. He was admitted in hospital and during course of treatment, the informant paid Rs.30,000/- whereas, the family members of the injured were demanding Rs.80,000/-. It is alleged that the petitioner along with others armed with lathi-danda came to the house of the informant and abused him and demanded Rs.80,000/- and assaulted his staff. From the case diary, I find that the injury is grievous, which is apparent from the report dated 30.6.2023, which is part of the case diary. From the impugned
order, I also find that inspite of notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C, the petitioner has not appeared before the Officer concerned. In view of the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to allow this anticipatory bail application. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, above named, is rejected. Anu/-C.P.-3
(ANANDA SEN, J.)