Jageshwar Mahto vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

Heard the parties through video conferencing. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with P.C.R. Case No.888 of 2016 registered under sections 354B of the Indian Penal Code.

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner outraged the modesty of the complainant. It is further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the learned Judicial Magistrate found that there was no reasonable ground to proceed against the petitioner and upon the revision application being filed by the complainant, the learned Magistrate was directed to pass order and only upon that, prima facie case under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code was found to be made out against the petitioner. It is further submitted that a proceeding under section 107 Cr.P.C. is going on between the petitioner and the complainant and the wife of the petitioner also lodged Kunda P.S. Case No. 126 of 2017 against the complainant and her husband, hence this false case has been foisted against the petitioner. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above named petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Deoghar, in connection with P.C.R. Case No.888 of 2016 with the condition that the petitioner will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.