Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 39017 (JHR)

GANESH YADAV v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./6613/2025 · 2025-11-24

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:JHHC:35047] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 6613 of 2025 1. Ganesh Yadav, aged about 63 Years, Son of Chaman Yadav. 2. Soniya Devi, aged about 52 years, Wife of Ganesh Yadav 3. Punam Devi, aged about 28 years, Wife of Rajesh Yadav All resident of Village-Khetko, Bai Tola, P.O. and P.s.-Khetko, District-Bokaro. ..... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand. ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioners : Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, A.P.P. ------ 03/ 24.11.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Petarwar P.S. Case No. 117 of 2025, registered for the offences under Sections 126 (2) /115(2) /109(1)/ 76 /303(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that there are general and omnibus allegations against these petitioners. She submits that petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are female members and they have also been falsely implicated in this case. She next submits that the petitioners are having no criminal antecedent and disclosure to that effect has been made in para-13 of the petition. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that the allegations of mischief are also there. 5. Looking into the contents of the FIR, it appears that so far [2025:JHHC:35047] -2- as petitioner No. 1 is concerned, the allegation of mischief is there and in that view of the matter, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner No. 1, named above. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. 6. So far as petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, there are general and omnibus allegations against them and they are female and further they are having no criminal antecedent and disclosure to that effect has been made in para-13 of the petition, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. 7. Accordingly, the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, named above, are directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of their surrender / arrest, the petitioners, named above, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty-five thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat, in connection with Petarwar P.S. Case No. 117 of 2025, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-24.11.2025 Amitesh/-