Rajendra Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 20 January, 2025

Jharkhand High Court

Rajendra Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 20 January, 2025

Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                A.B.A. No.6795 of 2024
                            ------

Rajendra Kumar, aged about 70 years, son of Late Ramchander
Mahato, Resident of Qr. No. IM 922, Rangmatia, Sindri, P.O. + P.S.-

     Sindri, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand
                                                 ....   ....   ....    Petitioner
                                        Versus
     1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Arun Kumar, Aged about 52 years, Son of Late Ramchandra
Mahato, Resident of Qr. No.-IM-583, Rangmatia, Sindri, P.O. + P.S.-
Sindri, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand
…. …. …. Opposite Parties

——

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

——

     For the Petitioner         : Mr. P. K. Mukhopadhyay, Advocate
     For the State              : Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, Addl.P.P
     For the O.P. No.2          : Mr. Wazid Ali, Advocate
                                      ------
     Order No.06 Dated- 20-01-2025
           Heard the parties.

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Sindri P.S. Case No.44 of
2024 instituted under Sections 452, 323, 325, 307, 504, 379, 506, 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of
privileges of anticipatory bail.

Learned 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 the
informant- Arun Kumar. It is submitted that the allegation against the
petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the petitioner is an old man of 70
years and he is also the elder brother of the informant. It is next submitted
that there was some misunderstanding, hence, this false case has been foisted
against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
counsel for the opposite party No.2 jointly submit that a compromise has
been effected to between the parties and the informant/opposite party No.2
does not want to proceed with the case. It is lastly submitted by the learned
counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with
the investigation of the case. 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 today and in the event of his arrest or
surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each
to the satisfaction of learned J.M.-1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with
Sindri P.S. Case No.44 of 2024 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 further conditions
as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Animesh/