Md. Khalil @ Khalilur Rahman vs State of Jharkhand

Heard the parties.

Defects, as pointed out by the office, are ignored.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sahibganj (M) P.S. Case No. 54 of 2018, G.R. No. 292 of 2018.

It has been alleged that son of the informant was married with Basera Khatoon about a year back. It has further been alleged that the petitioner who happens to be the brother in law of the deceased (Sarhu) had developed an illicit relationship with Basera Khatoon and had also tried to take the thumb impression of the deceased on a piece of paper in order to get the deceased and Basera Khatoon divorced. Further allegation has been levelled that the son of the informant had attended a party on 23.4.2018 but when he did not return, a search was made and subsequently his dead body was found at Rampur mouza.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that suspicion was not cast upon the petitioner and infact the FIR was instituted against unknown persons. He has further submitted that after eight months of the occurrence, the name of the petitioner has surfaced. He has also submitted that suspicion has been cast upon the petitioner only on account of the purported illicit relationship the petitioner was having with the wife of the deceased.

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail made by the petitioner and has stated that the fardbeyan itself reflects the involvement of the petitioner to the effect that he was having an illicit relationship with the deceased and was pressurizing the deceased to give Talak to Basera Khatoon.

It appears that some of the co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in A.B.A. No. 4791 of 2019 and A.B.A. No. 6530 of 2019. The implication of the petitioner therefore is on account of the alleged illicit relationship he was having with Basera Khatoon and an inference was drawn that on account of such illicit relationship, the son of the informant was murdered.

Consequent to what has been stated above, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

The petitioner, named above, is therefore directed to surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today and pray for regular bail, and in that event, he will be enlarged on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- ( Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj, in connection with Sahibganj (M) P.S. Case No. 54 of 2018, G.R. No. 292 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

This application stands allowed.