Jharkhand High Court
Akhilesh Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 7 April, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
( 2025:JHHC:10671 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No.6516 of 2024
------
1. Akhilesh Yadav, aged about 37 years, Son of Late Tejo Yadav.
2. Gauri Devi, age about 35 years, W/O- Akhilesh Yadav
Both of R/o- Tilaiya, PO- Dawari, PS- Gidhour, District-
Chatra. .... .... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Tuliya Devi wife of Kanhaiya Yadav R/o- Tilaiya, PO-
Dawari, PS- Gidhour, District- Chatra.
…. …. …. Opposite Parties
——
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
——
For the Petitioners : Mr. Vijay Kr. Sharma, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Amrita Kumari, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.06 Dated-07-04-2025
I.A. No.4022 of 2025
Heard the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this interlocutory
application has been filed with a prayer for early hearing.
Since hearing of this Anticipatory Bail Application is taken up today,
hence, this interlocutory application is disposed of being infructuous.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
A.B.A. No.6516 of 2024
Apprehending their arrest in connection with Gidhour P.S. Case No.18
of 2024 instituted under Sections 147/148/149/341/323/354/452/504/
427/307/506/325/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Prevention
of Witch (Daain) Practice Act, 2001, the petitioners have moved this Court for
grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the
allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were member of an
unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the assembly,
attempted to murder Kanhaiya Yadav. It is submitted that the allegation
against the petitioners is false. Drawing attention of this court towards para-
13 of the instant bail application, learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent. It is next submitted that
there was a free fight between the parties and from the side of the
petitioners, petitioner No.2 first lodged Gidhour P.S. Case No.85 of 2023 and
as a counter-blast, as an afterthought, after an inordinate delay, the
informant has filed complaint case No.134 of 2024 in the court of Judicial
Magistrate-1st Class, Chatra which upon being referred to police under
Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the FIR of this case has
been registered. It is further submitted that the allegations are general and
omnibus in nature. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners undertake to co-
operate with the investigation of the case and to furnish sufficient security
including cash security. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given
the privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and
circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory
bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender
in the Court below within six weeks from today and in the event of their
arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on depositing
Rs.10,000/- each as cash security and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/-
(Twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Chatra in connection
with Gidhour P.S. Case No.18 of 2024 with the condition that they will co-
operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the
investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish their mobile
numbers and photocopy of the Aadhar Cards with an undertaking that
they will not change their mobile numbers 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/
[ad_1]
Source link