Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 27792 (JHR)

SOMNATH KUMAR CHOURASIYA ALIAS SOMNATH PD. CHOURASIYA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./6985/2024 · 2025-06-18

Sri Ananda Sen

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:15958 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.6985 of 2024 ------ 1.Somnath Kumar Chourasiya @ Somnath Pd. Chourasiya, son of Sri Narad Muni Mahto 2.Satendra Chourasiya @ Satendra Prasad, son of Sri Narad Muni Mahto 3.Narad Muni Mahto @ Naradmuni Mahto, son of late Ram Nandan Mahto 4.Ajay Kumar Chourasiya, son of Sri Rama Shankar Mahto All are residents of village Majhigawan, PO Narsinghpur Pathra, PS Chainpur, District Palamau, Jharkhand … … Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opposite Party(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Mishra, A.P.P. ----- 04/ 18.06.2025 Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest for offences registered under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 325, 307, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau in connection with Chainpur PS Case No. 297 of 2023. 3. Learned A.P.P. representing the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. 4. It is alleged that these petitioners have assaulted the informant. From the impugned order, I find that the injury which was caused on Bharat Mahto is of swelling and bruise and is simple in nature caused by hard and blunt object. So far as injury on Mandip Kumar is concerned, the same is grievous as there is fracture of nasal bone. 5. The petitioner no. 1 was carrying an axe which is a sharp weapon but there is no sharp cut injury on the victims. The petitioner no. 2 was carrying stick. There is nothing to suggest whether other petitioners were carrying any weapon, thus, 2025:JHHC:15958 2 according to my opinion section 307 of the Indian Penal Code may not be attracted in this case. Rest of the offences are bailable offence. The petitioners should appear before the court concerned who will pass order as per the law. 6. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/Cp-3