Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9714 (JHR)

MADAN GANJHU v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./2230/2025 · 2025-04-07

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:JHHC:10604] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.2230 of 2025 ------ 1. Madan Ganjhu aged about 35 years son of Late Jitan Ganjhu 2. Janki Ganjhu aged about 21 years son of late Rohan Ganjhu All above petitioners are resident of village Kasadawr, Post office Kubba, Police Station Hunterganj, Dist.-Chatra, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Manish Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mr. P. K. Chatterjee @ Prabir Chatterjee, Spl. P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 07-04-2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 172 of 2023 registered under sections 33 (1) (c) of Indian Forest Act. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner encroached upon the forest land by clearing the forest. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the petitioners have no concern with the alleged poppy plantation. It is next submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the anticipatory bail application. It is next submitted that the co-accused with similar allegations has already been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by this court vide order dated 05.02.2025 passed in ABA no. 731 of 2025. It is then submitted that the petitioners undertake to furnish sufficient security including cash security and also undertake to cooperate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Spl. 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 J.M. 1st Class, Chatra, in connection with Complaint Case No. 172 of 2023 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the trial of the case subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Rohit/