Jharkhand High Court
Ramdeo Sao vs The State Of Jharkhand & Anr. ... ... on 27 September, 2023
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 383 of 2023
------
1. Ramdeo Sao
2. Mukesh Saw
3. Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Saw
4. Shankar Sao @ Shankar Saw ... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand & Anr. ... Opposite Parties
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Addl. P.P.
------
Order No.05 Dated- 27.09.2023 Heard the parties.
Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Compliant Case No.933 of 2022 registered under sections 147/148/ 149/323/341/307/354B/379/380/386/427/504/120B/34/376/511 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3/4 of Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act.
The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no.1 being the father-in-law, petitioner no.2 being the brother-in-law (dewar) and the petitioner nos.3 and 4 being agnates of the deceased husband of the complainant have committed theft of cash of Rs.6,00,000/- and gold and silver jewelry. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and earlier also the complainant lodged Nawalsahi P.S. Case No.80 of 2021 and the wife of the petitioner lodged Nawalsahi P.S. Case No.81 of 2021 against the complainant and others. It is then submitted that the dispute between the parties is regarding partition of property. Drawing attention of this court to Annexure-6 at page no. 44 of the brief, it is submitted that in the photograph of the joint house of the parties the left side room and corridor has been allocated to the complainant in the partition of property between the parties. It is then submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the trial of the case and also undertakes that they will not annoy or disturb the complainant in possessing and enjoying the said portion of the house peacefully 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 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 J.M. 1st Class, Koderma, in connection with Compliant Case No.933 of 2022 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the trial of the case with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the complainant in possessing and enjoying the said portion of the house peacefully during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-