Samresh Kumar Deo @ Samresh Kumar Dev And Others vs State Of Jharkhand

Rajesh Kumar, J

Heard the parties.

The applicant(s), who are accused for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 353,332, 333, 337, 393, 448, 427, 506 and 120B IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pray for anticipatory bail expressing apprehension of arrest in connection with Sindri P.S. Case No.92 of 2022.

Innocence has been claimed and undertaking has been given to co-operate with the Investigating Officer. It has been submitted that one of the co-accused, similarly situated, has already been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.04.2023 passed in A.B.A. No.516 of 2023.On the above basis, prayer for anticipatory bail has been made.

On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant (s) and it has been submitted that it is an organized crime and the office has been destroyed and if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the applicants, negative effect will go to the environment of the State. Further, it has been argued that the Apex Court has not prohibited the arrest rather mandated for regulation of arrest.

Considering the nature of crime and the material available on record, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the applicant(s).

However, Investigating Agency and the Court below are directed to follow the procedure mandated by Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Anr. reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825.

Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant(s) is, hereby, rejected.