Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2836 (JHR)

RANDHIR KUMAR RAY @ RANDHIR ROY v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./276/2025 · 2025-01-22

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.276 of 2025 ------ 1. Randhir Kumar Ray @ Randhir Ray, aged about 31 years, son of Sri Dani Prasad Ray, resident of Village- Asahna, P.O.- Sabaijor & P.S.- Sarath, District- Deoghar 2. Dharamveer Roy, aged about 26 years, son of Sri Dani Prasad Roy, resident of Village- Asahna, P.O.- Sabaijor & P.S.- Sarath, District- Deoghar. 3. Dani Prasad Ray, aged about 52 years, son of Sri Baleshwar Ray, resident of Village- Asahna, P.O.- Sabaijor & P.S.- Sarath, District- Deoghar .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Siddharth Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 22-01-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Sarath P.S. Case No.116 of 2024 instituted under Sections 126 (2), 115 (2), 109 (1), 303, 324 (4), 3 (5) of the B.N.S., 2023, 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, assaulted the informant and snatched away his gold chain and damaged his vehicle. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is next submitted that as the petitioner No.1 was supporter of one of the candidates in election, hence, the other side instituted this false case for creating a friction. It is further submitted that the petitioners undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant 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 Sarath P.S. Case No.116 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 number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case and they will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case and further conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/