High CourtsSingle Bench

Soni Devi And Ors vs State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 8 April 2021 · Citation: (2021) 04 JH CK 0084

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 341, 379, 504, 506 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
CASE NUMBER
A.B.A. No. 2572 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 493 words

Heard the parties through video conferencing. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Manika P.S. Case No.87 of 2020 registered under sections 147/148/ 149/323/341/324/307/379/504/506 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were the members of an unlawful assembly and being armed with deadly weapons in prosecution of common object of the assembly, they attempted to murder Motimwa Devi, Akhilesh, Ramesh Singh and Dineshwar Singh. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is then submitted that for the selfsame occurrence from the side of the petitioners, the husband of the petitioner no.1 has also lodged an F.I.R. basing upon which Manika P.S. Case No. 86 of 2020 has been instituted against the informant and others and as a counter blast, this false case has been foisted against the petitioners. It is then submitted that the petitioners have no intention to kill anybody and they are all females. It is next submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to jointly pay Rs.40,000/- as ad interim victim compensation to the informant without prejudice to their defence in this case and undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case and also undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the victims or their family members in any manner during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners 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 petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on jointly depositing a demand draft of Rs.40,000/- as ad interim victim compensation in favour of informant and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Latehar, in connection with Manika P.S. Case No.87 of 2020 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish their mobile number and a copy of their Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

In case, the petitioners deposit the ad interim victim compensation amount, the court below is directed to issue notice to the informant and hand over the said demand draft to her, after proper identification.