Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29509 (JHR)

SHEKH AMIRUDDIN SIDIKI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./7843/2024 · 2025-01-07

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.7843 of 2024 ------ 1. Shekh Amiruddin Sidiki @ Shekh Amiruddin Sidhiki 2. Shekh Haidar Ali @ Shekh Haidar .... .... …. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Irshad Ahmad .... .... .... Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Gopal K. Sinha, Advocate Mr. Chanchal Chhaya, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, Addl.P.P For the OP No.2 : Md. Sajid Yunus, Advocate ------ Order No.03 Dated- 07-01-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Manjhiaon P.S. Case No.47 of 2024 instituted under Sections 420, 455, 342, 323, 386, 387, 447, 434, 427, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act, 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 entered into an agreement with the informant to execute sale deed in respect of two and half decimals of land but the petitioners have executed the sale deed in respect of only two decimals of land. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegation against the petitioners is false. The informant has encroached upon more than the purchased land. Hence the petitioner filed Misc. Case No. 62 of 2024 under section 144 of Cr.PC and as a counter- blast this false case has been foisted. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. The dispute between the parties is at best a civil dispute. Admittedly, the petitioners have already executed two sale deeds in favour of the informant. The petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation of the case and undertake not to disturb the informant in any manner during pendency of the case. 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.5,000/- as cash security each 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 A.C.J.M., Garhwa in connection with Manjhiaon P.S. Case No.47 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 numbers and photocopy of the Aadhar Cards with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers 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.) RKM/