Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5967 (JHR)

CHANCHAL YADAV v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./1404/2025 · 2025-03-03

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. 1404 of 2025 ------ 1. Chanchal Yadav, aged about 45 years, son of Suttam Yadav 2. Rinku Devi @ Savita Devi, aged about 40 years, wife of Chanchal Yadav 3. Manoj Kumar, aged about 21 years, son of Chanchal Yadav All are resident of Village-Chilona, P.O.-Malini, P.S.- Godda (M), Dist.-Godda … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Manoj Kr. Sah, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 03.03.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Godda (M) P.S. Case No.147 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 126(2)/ 127(2)/ 115(2)/ 109/ 303(2)/ 117(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 forcibly caught hold of the scrotum of the informant. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and genesis of the occurrence is land dispute between the parties. It is then submitted that for the selfsame occurrence, from the side of the petitioners, Complaint Case No. 831 of 2024 has been instituted against the informant, his wife and his son and the petitioners had no intention to kill anybody. 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 annoy or disturb the informant in any manner 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 C.J.M., Godda, in connection with Godda (M) P.S. Case No.147 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 annoy or disturb the informant 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-