Jharkhand High Court
Loknath Yadav (Aged About 41 Yrs) Son Of … vs The State Of Jharkhand …. …. …. … on 29 January, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No.644 of 2025
------
Loknath Yadav (aged about 41 yrs) son of Kali Yadav, resident of
village- Govindpur, P.O.- Jamua, P.S.- Jamua, District- Giridih.
…. …. …. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand …. …. …. Opposite Party
——
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
——
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ram Lakhan Yadav, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal, Spl. P.P
——
Order No.06 Dated- 29-01-2025
Heard the parties.
Apprehending his arrest in connection with Jamua P.S. Case No.406 of
2023 corresponding to G.R. No.1879 of 2024 instituted under Sections 147,
149, 341, 342, 323, 324, 307, 379, 385, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, the
petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against
the petitioner is that the petitioner being member of an unlawful assembly,
attempted to murder- Ajay Kumar Barnwal and Santosh Yadav and
committed theft of Rs.15,000/- from the pocket of Ajay Kumar Barnwal and
Rs.10,000/- from the pocket of Santosh Kumar and demanded extortion. It is
submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next
submitted that there was a free-fight between the parties and for the self-
same occurrence, Jamua P.S. Case No.413 of 2013 was also instituted from
the side of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner had no
intention to kill anybody. It is also submitted that the dispute between the
parties is regarding establishing a private mine by blasting made by the
informant in a private land illegally. It is further submitted that the petitioner
undertakes to co-operate with the investigation of the case and he will not
annoy or disturb the informant, victim or any of their family members in any
manner during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the
petitioner undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security.
Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of
anticipatory bail.
Learned Spl.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 depositing Rs.10,000/- as cash
security and 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, Giridih in connection with Jamua P.S. Case No.406 of 2023
corresponding to G.R. No.1879 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 he
will not annoy or disturb the informant, victim or any of their family
members in any manner 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.)
Abhiraj/
