Azad Ansari vs The State of Jharkhand

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147 / 148 / 149 / 384 / 386 / 504 / 509 / 427 / 435 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The present F.I.R. was lodged by one Arvind Kumar, Security Manager of M/s. Inland Power Ltd. Co. Initially the F.I.R. was lodged against the agitated members of ''Nagrik Chetna Manch'', Gola. However during the investigation of the case, the petitioner was implicated without any cogent material collected by the police against her. The learned counsel further submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and the petitioner has been implicated in this case merely on the basis of statements of hearsay witnesses. On perusal of the written-report of the informant, it would appear that the main allegation is against co-accused Rajeev Jaiswal who himself alongwith co-accused Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Pujhar have been granted regular bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.01.2017 in B.A. No.164 of 2017. Other co-accused Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Mahto, Chandan Mahto and Bajrang Mahto have already been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.02.2017 in A.B.A. No.4942 of 2016. The petitioner was allegedly the part of the mob led by co-accused Rajiv Jaiswal. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 15.10.2016 and, therefore, she may be given the privilege of regular bail.

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the petitioner''s prayer for bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner, named above, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ramgarh in connection with Rajrappa P.S. Case No.81 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. No.995 of 2016.

Since, this bail application itself has been disposed of, the interlocutory application being I.A. No.1373 of 2017 is also disposed of accordingly.