Anil Kumar vs State of Jharkhand

Learned counsel Mr. Krishna Nand Sahay for the petitioner and Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, learned A.P.P. representing the State are present through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the following surviving defects within a period of two weeks:

Affidavit is older than 7 days.

Parental name of the petitioner at page no.1 and Vakalatnama differs.

Order date may be corrected at para 15.

Petitioner seeks the protection of Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with Saria P.S. Case No. 38 of 2019 for the offence registered under Section 272/273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 47(A) of the Excise Act, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R and has been implicated only on the confessional statement of co- accused Ghanshyam Yadav @ Babu, who is named in the F.I.R. The allegation relate to manufacture of wine by setting up a factory and recovery of certain English wine from the said house. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that apart from the confessional statement of the co- accused Ghanshyam Yadav, there is no incriminating material against this petitioner, neither has anything been recovered from his possession or his place. Recovery has been made from the house situate at the Pawapur Forest. Petitioner is involved in contractual work and agriculture. Ghanshyam Yadav has been granted regular bail in Bail Petition No. 521 of 2019, vide order dated 13.06.2019 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge- IV, Giridih. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has earlier been granted anticipatory bail in connection with two other cases by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court as per statements made at para 15 (Annexure-2). As such, petitioner is not going to abscond and undertakes to comply with all the conditions, as may be imposed for grant of anticipatory bail.

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer.

Having considered the facts and circumstances noted above and that petitioner has been named during confession by the co-accused Ghanshyam Yadav and that Ghanshyam Yadav has earlier been enlarged on regular bail by the court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-IV, Giridih in Bail Petition No. 521 of 2019, order dated 13.06.2019 and that nothing has been recovered from his possession or his place, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner, above named, in the event of his surrender or arrest within in a period of 4 weeks, shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in connection with Saria P.S. No. 38 of 2019, subject to the conditions laid down u/s 438(2) Cr.P.C.