LALAN DAS ALIAS LALAN KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
A.B.A./1032/2025 · 2025-02-14
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4863 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4863 (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. 1032 of 2025
------
1. Lalan Das @ Lalan Kumar, aged about 30 years, Son of Sudama Das @ Sudama Ravidas, Resident of Village – Marudih, P.O. –Nawagadh, P.S. –Dhanwar, Dist. –Giridih.
2. Tinku Thakur @ Tinku Kumar Thakur, aged about 27 years, Son of Raj Kumar Thakur, Resident of Village – Marudih, P.O. –Nawagadh, P.S. –Dhanwar, Dist- Giridih.
… Petitioners
Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Mahesh Kr. Sinha(2), Advocate For the State
: Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, Addl. P.P. ------
Order No.02 Dated- 14.02.2025
Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No.228 of 2024 registered under sections 137(2), 96, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons misbehaved with the daughter of the informant and beat and snatched away Rs.3,000/- as well as his mobile phone from Neeraj and also demanded Rs.12,000/-. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the main allegation is against Neeraj Rana. It is then submitted that the alleged victim girl was in love with Neeraj Rana over a period of two years and the co-accused Neeraj Rana is a juvenile. It is then submitted that the petitioners undertake to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or his family members in any manner during the pendency of the case during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. 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 petitioners 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.10,000/- 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 Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Giridih, in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No.228 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioners 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 number and a copy of their Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case with further condition that that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or his family members 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-