Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5832 (JHR)

BAIJNATH SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./1044/2025 · 2025-02-19

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No. 1044 of 2025 1. Baijnath Singh, aged about 44 years, son of Somar Singh 2. Mahabeer Singh @ Bajrangi Singh, aged about 29 years, son of Jageshwar Singh @ Jago Singh 3. Bijay Singh @ Vijay Singh, aged about 32 years, Son of Churaman Singh 4. Manoj Singh, aged about 37 years, son of Hari Singh all resident of village -Sahariya Tola Dumariyatand, P.O-Bhendra, P.S-Nawadih, Dist-Bokaro … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … opp. Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioners : Mr. Nandan Prasad, Adv. For the State : Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, Addl. PP 02 / 19.02.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Nawadih P.S. Case No. 05 of 2024 registered under Sections 341, 324, 307, 379, 427, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in furtherance of the common intention attempted to murder the staff of the informant causing injury on his head and also damaged the swing and the tube lights put by the informant in a fair. It is then submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and those allegations are general and omnibus in nature. Drawing attention of the court to page 22-23 of the brief, which is the copy of the certified copy of the joint compromise petition filed in the court of learned ACJM, Bermo, it is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the matter has been settled between the parties. It is next submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigation of the case and also undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security and they undertake not to annoy or disturb the informant or his employees in any manner during pendency of the case hence, the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. The learned Addl. PP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners. Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Hence, in the event of arrest by the police or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, the petitioners shall be released on bail on depositing Rs. 20,000/- each as cash security 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 ACJM, Bermo at Tenughat in connection with Nawadih P.S. Case No. 05 of 2024 subject to the condition that the petitioners will not annoy or disturb the informant or his employees in any manner during pendency of the case and will co-operate with the Investigation of the case and will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will submit mobile number and photocopy of Aadhaar card at the time of surrender in the court below with an undertaking not to change mobile phone number during the pendency of the case along with the other conditions laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS, 2023. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Smita/-