Jharkhand High Court
Basudeo Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand …. …. …. … on 7 April, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
[2025:JHHC:10642]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No.3642 of 2024
------
1. Basudeo Mandal, aged about 27 years, son of Mohan Mandal,
resident of Vill- Jagadih, P.O. + P.S.- Karon, Dist- Deoghar
2. Mukesh Mandal, aged about 30 years, son of Robin Mandal,
resident of Vill- Jagadih, P.O. + P.S.- Karon, Dist- Deoghar
3. Amar Kumar Mandal @ Amar Mandal, aged about 33 years, son of
Jayprakash Mandal, resident of Vill- Jagadih, P.O. + P.S.- Karon,
Dist- Deoghar ….. …. …. Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand …. …. …. Opposite Party
——
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
——
For the Petitioners : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, Addl.P.P
——
Order No.09 Dated- 07-04-2025
Heard the parties.
Apprehending their arrest in connection with Karon P.S. Case No.15 of
2024 instituted under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 120B, 341, 342, 307,
427, 333, 353 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Prevention of
Damage to Public Property Act, 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 being members of an
unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons, attempted to murder
police personnels, who went to the place of occurrence for arrest of accused
person, in an offence relating to cyber-crime. It is then submitted that the
petitioner no.1 and 2 have one criminal antecedents each whereas the
petitioner No. 3 has no criminal antecedents. It is submitted that the
allegation against the petitioners is false. It is next submitted that the
petitioners had no intention to kill anybody. It is next submitted that the co-
accused, with similar allegations, have already been given the privileges of
anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 18.02.2025 passed in A.B.A.
No.3870 of 2024. 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 petitioner Nos.1 and
2 depositing Rs.20,000/- each as cash security and petitioner No.3
depositing Rs.10,000/- as cash security and all of them 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 A.C.J.M., Madhupur in connection
with Karon P.S. Case No.15 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
number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they
will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case and
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Animesh/
[ad_1]
Source link