Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2631 (JHR)

PARMESHWAR MAHATHA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./320/2025 · 2025-01-23

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. 320 of 2025 ------ 1. Parmeshwar Mahatha, aged about 47 years, 2. Ram Dev Mahatha @ Ramdeo Kumar Mahatha, aged about 32 years 3. Maheshwar Mahatha, aged about 36 years All sons of late Shyama Pada Mahatha, resident of Village- Bandhgora, P.O.-Satanpur, P.S.-Pindrajora, Dist.-Bokaro, Jharkhand … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Indarjit Sinha, Advocate : Mr. Sagar Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 23.01.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Pindrajora P.S. Case No.178 of 2023 registered under sections 406/420/467/468/471/323/506/386/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners have executed a sale deed in respect of the land belonging to the informant, on the basis of forged land revenue receipt and other forged documents. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and for the same set of allegations, the informant previously filed Complaint Case No. 516 of 2022, in which the petitioners were granted anticipatory bail. It is next submitted that the dispute between the parties is at best a civil dispute. It is then submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case and further undertake that they will annoy or disturb the informant or any of his family members in any manner during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the abovenamed petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1st Class, Bokaro, in connection with Pindrajora P.S. Case No.178 of 2023 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish their mobile numbers and a copy of their Aadhar Cards in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the pendency of the case with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or any of his family members in any manner during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-