Diyam Gupta @ D.M. Gupta vs The State Of Jharkhand … Opposite … on 21 January, 2025

Jharkhand High Court

Diyam Gupta @ D.M. Gupta vs The State Of Jharkhand … Opposite … on 21 January, 2025

Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
               A.B.A. No. 5544 of 2024
                           ------

1. Diyam Gupta @ D.M. Gupta, aged about 36 years, s/o
Ramnath Sah

2. Ramlal Gupta, aged about 32 years, s/o Ramnath Sah, both
are r/o Village-Basdih Khurd, P.O. & P.S.-Ketar, Dist.-

          Garhwa, Jharkhand              ...           Petitioner
                                Versus
       The State of Jharkhand         ...             Opposite Party
                                 ------

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

——

       For the Petitioner      : Mr. Sheo Kr. Singh, Advocate
       For the State           : Mrs. Lily Sahay, Addl. P.P.
       For the Informant       : Mr. J.N. Upadhyay, Advocate
                                     ------
       Order No.04 Dated- 21.01.2025

             Heard the parties.

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this
Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with
Ketar P.S. Case No.35 of 2024 registered under sections 341/323/
307/504/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in
furtherance of their common intention with the co-accused persons
attempted to murder the informant and his mother. It is further
submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false.
Drawing attention of this Court to I.A. No. 262 of 2025, it is jointly
submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned counsel for the informant that the informant and the
petitioners have settled their dispute outside the Court, with the
intervention of well-wishers, friends and relatives. It is next jointly
submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned counsel for the informant that due to misunderstanding,
this instant case was lodged by the informant and the informant
does not want to contest the case. It is then submitted that the
petitioners undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the
case and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the
informant or any of his family members 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 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, Nagar Untari, Garhwa, in
connection with Ketar P.S. Case No.35 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 or any of his family members 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.

Consequently, Interlocutory Application No. 262 of 2025 is
disposed of accordingly.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Sonu/Gunjan-