Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5337 (JHR)

SANJAY KUMAR ALIAS SANJAY KUMAR SHARMA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./1108/2025 · 2025-02-18

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. 1108 of 2025 ------ 1. Sanjay Sharma @ Sanjay Kumar Sharma, aged about 46 years, son of Santosh Mahtha @ Santosh Kumar Mahatha, resident of Village-Barkama, P.O. & P.S.-Chandankiyari, Dist.-Bokaro, Jharkhand 2. Hari Mahtha @ Harihar Mahatha, aged about 48 years, son of Santosh Mahtha @ Santosh Kumar Mahatha, resident of Village-Phatudih, P.O. & P.S.-Chandankiyari, Dist.-Bokaro, Jharkhand … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate : Mr. Amit Kr. Choubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Azeemuddin, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 18.02.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Chandankiyari P.S. Case No.209 of 2024 registered under sections 191(2)/190/189(5)/132/352 of the B.N.S., 2023. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that consequent upon the accident that took place between two vehicles, the petitioners blocked the road and provoked the persons not to receive compensation from the state administration on the account of the death of the deceased causing inconvenience to several persons. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioners 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 indulge in similar type of offence while on bail. 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 petitioner no.1 depositing cash security of Rs. 10,000/- and petitioner no.2 depositing cash security of Rs. 20,000/- and both the petitioners 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, Bokaro, in connection with Chandankiyari P.S. Case No.209 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 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 indulge in similar type of offence while on bail subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-