LALIT SAH ALIAS LALJIT GUPTA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
A.B.A./7561/2024 · 2025-03-25
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 28630 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 28630 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 7561 of 2024
------
1. Lalit Sah @ Laljit Gupta, aged about 40 years, son of Dwarika Prasad
2. Manish Sah @ Manish Kumar, aged about 42 years, son of Devnandan Saw
3. Jogindar Sah @ Yogendra Kumar, aged about 32 years, son of Govind Saw All are resident of Near Shiv Mandir, Chhat Ghat, P.O. & P.S.-Agrico, Town-Jamshedpur, Dist.-East Singhbhum
… Petitioners
Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Sourav Kumar, Advocate For the State
: Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Addl. P.P. ------
Order No.05 Dated- 25.03.2025 I.A. No. 3561 of 2025
Heard the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer for early hearing of this anticipatory bail application.
Since, this anticipatory bail application is taken up today hence, the prayer has become infructuous.
Accordingly, this interlocutory application is disposed of being infructuous.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) A.B.A. No. 7561 of 2024
1. Heard the parties.
2. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Sidhgora P.S. Case No.173 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 126(2)/ 115(2)/ 118(1)/ 117(2)/ 118(2)/ 75/ 352/351(2)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and under Section 3/4 of Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.2-Manish Sah @ Manish Kumar has since been arrested and he does not press this anticipatory bail application on behalf of the petitioner no.2.
4. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner no.2-Manish Sah @ Manish Kumar is rejected as not pressed.
5. So far as the petitioner nos.1 and 3 are concerned, the
learned counsel for the petitioner nos.1 and 3 submits that the allegation against the petitioner nos.1 and 3 is that the petitioner nos.1 and 3 in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons assaulted the husband and son of the informant and also outrated her modesty and used the word daain and attempted to murder the informant and her family members. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner nos.1 and 3 are all false and the alleged injuries are simple in nature. It is then submitted that the petitioner nos.1 and 3 undertake to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner nos.1 and 3 be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
7. 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 petitioner nos.1 and 3 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 depositing cash security of Rs. 20,000/- each and 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, Jamshedpur, in connection with Sidhgora P.S. Case No.173 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioner nos.1 and 3 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 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-