Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7652 (JHR)

BASANT KUMAR YADAV ALIAS BASANT YADAV v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./1695/2025 · 2025-03-12

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.1695 of 2025 ------ Basant Kumar Yadav @ Basant Yadav, aged about 26 years, S/o Janeshwar Yadav, R/o Village- Sungari, P.O.- Munkuri, P.S.- Chhattarpur, District- Palamau, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. A. K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kr. Pathak, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated-12-03-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest in connection with Chhattarpur P.S. Case No.16 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No.1051 of 2022 instituted under Sections 307/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons, attempted to murder Yogendra Yadav by firing upon his fore arm. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that there is an unexplained delay of two days in lodging the FIR. It is next submitted that it is evident from the FIR itself that there was a land dispute between the parties. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no intention to kill the informant. It is further submitted that the injury is not on vital part of the body. It is also submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case and to furnish sufficient security including cash security. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl.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 the date of the order and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on depositing Rs.50,000/- 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 Judicial Magistrate, Palamau in connection with Chhattarpur P.S. Case No.16 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No.1051 of 2022 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 his 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.) Saroj/