Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4307 (JHR)

CHHOTU PANDEY ALIAS VIVEK KUMAR PANDEY v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./815/2025 · 2025-02-06

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.815 of 2025 ------ Chhotu Pandey @ Vivek Kumar Pandey, aged about 28 years, son of Late Surendra Kumar Pandey, resident of Gyan Mukherjee Road, P.O. and P.S. Dhanbad, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Md. Zaid Ahmed, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 06-02-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.465 of 2024 instituted under Sections 115 (2), 118 (1), 109, 303, 351 and 352 of the B.N.S., 2023, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner attempted to murder the informant. It is further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that there is no material in the record to show the nature of injuries sustained by the alleged victim and the petitioner himself has sustained severe injuries caused by the informant. It is also submitted that for the self-same occurrence, Dhanbad P.S. Case No.469 of 2024 has also been lodged by the petitioner. It is then submitted that the petitioner had no intention to kill anybody. It is next submitted that the informant was the aggressor party and only to save his skin, this false case has been foisted by the informant against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the investigation of the case and that he will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned Spl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on depositing Rs.10,000/- as cash security and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Dhanbad in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.465 of 2024 with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change her mobile number during the pendency of the case and he 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/