Rahul Yadav vs State Of Jharkhand

Ratnaker Bhengra, J

Heard both the counsels.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR rather he has been falsely implicated in this case due to the reason that the petitioner is the owner-cum-driver of the tractor. The learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner was not arrested on the spot and he is a poor farmer. The learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Therefore, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail.

Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the anticipatory bail application and has submitted that the petitioner may be a poor farmer but he is the owner of the tractor, therefore, fully liable for the allegation.

Having gone through the case records and after hearing the learned counsel for both the sides, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is directed to surrender in the court below within two weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/-( Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned JMFC, Giridih in connection with Bagodar P.S. Case No. 84 of 2022, with the conditions that (i) the petitioner will submit self-attested photocopy of his Aadhaar Card and also submit his mobile number before the learned Court below which he will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of the Court and (ii) subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.