Jharkhand High Court
Sachin Yadav @ Sachin Kumar Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 March, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.196 of 2025
-----
Sachin Yadav @ Sachin Kumar Yadav, aged about 23 years,
son of Kamlesh Yadav, Resident of Kerkend Khatal, P.O.
Kusunda, P.S.-Putki, District-Dhanbad.
... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent
-------
CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
——-
For the Appellant : Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl. P.P.
——
rd
Order No. 03/Dated 3 March, 2025
1. The instant appeal has been preferred under Section 21
(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 for setting
aside the order dated 25.01.2025 passed in Anticipatory Bail
Petition No.262 of 2025 by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-VII, Dhanbad in connection with Putki P.S. Case No.23 of
2024 registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149,
323, 337, 353, 307, 387 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code,
Section 27 of the Arms Act and under Section 3/4/5 of the
Explosive Substance Act, 1908, whereby and whereunder, the
appellant’s prayer for anticipatory bail has been rejected.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has
submitted that it is a case where the appellant has falsely been
implicated.
3. It has further been submitted that the petitioner has got
no concern with any of the members of said coal lifting parties
and at the time of occurrence of this case, the petitioner was at
his duty.
1
4. Learned counsel has further submitted that no case is
made out against the petitioner under alleged Sections of the
Indian Penal Code or under the Explosive Substance Act or
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
5. It has been contended that identically placed co-
accused persons, namely, Kapil Kumar Paswan @ Kapil Paswan
and Anil Kumar Singh @ Mantu Singh in Cr. Appeal (DB)
No.610 of 2024, Deepak Paswan in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.804 of
2024, Karan Paswan in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1096 of 2024, Prem
Yadav in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.841 of 2024 and Ranjit Ravani @
Ranjeet Kumar Rawani in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1563 of 2024 have
been directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail by Coordinate
Bench of this Court, and the case of the present appellant is
identically placed, hence, this appeal may also be allowed.
6. Based on the aforesaid grounds, learned counsel for the
appellant has submitted that the impugned order may be
interfered with.
7. While on the other hand, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor though opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail, but,
he is fair enough to submit that similarly situated co-accused
persons have been granted privilege of pre-arrest bail by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court.
8. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties
and has gone across the impugned order rejecting the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the appellant.
9. It appears from the materials available on record that
the allegation reveals that with respect to lifting of coal the
2
dispute had arose which led to a scuffle with the police and
thereafter both the sides started pelting stones and hurling
bombs as well as fired bullets resulting in one of the accused,
namely, Sonu Yadav being seriously injured.
10. First Information Report has been lodged against
several named and unknown persons who were amongst the
participants of the mob.
11. It further appears that similarly situated co-accused
persons, namely, namely, Kapil Kumar Paswan @ Kapil Paswan
and Anil Kumar Singh @ Mantu Singh in Cr. Appeal (DB)
No.610 of 2024, Deepak Paswan in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.804 of
2024, Karan Paswan in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1096 of 2024, Prem
Yadav in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.841 of 2024 and Rankit Ravani @
Ranjeet Kumar Rawani in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1563 of 2024 have
been directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail by Coordinate
Bench of this Court.
12. This Court, on consideration of the fact that similarly
situated co-accused persons have been granted privilege of pre-
arrest bail, is of the view that the impugned order needs to be
interfered with.
13. Accordingly, the order dated 25.01.2025 passed in
Anticipatory Bail Petition No.262 of 2025 by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Dhanbad in connection with
Putki P.S. Case No.23 of 2024, is, hereby, quashed and set
aside.
14. In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed.
3
15. On consideration of the aforesaid facts, this Court is
inclined to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the
appellant. Accordingly, the appellant, above named, is directed
to surrender before the learned Court below within 15 days, and
in the event of his surrender/arrest, he shall be released on
bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad
in connection with Putki P.S. Case No.23 of 2024, subject to
the conditions that the appellant shall co-operate in the
trial and shall not absent himself on the date fixed without
any cogent cause. In case of non-cooperation in trial, it will
be left open upon the prosecuting agency to move before
the concerned court for cancellation of bail bond.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Birendra/
4
[ad_1]
Source link