Vijay Tiwary @ Vjay Kumar Tiwary @ Vijay ... vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 31 January, 2022

[Cites 17, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Vijay Tiwary @ Vjay Kumar Tiwary @ Vijay ... vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 31 January, 2022

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         A.B. A. No. 296 of 2022

                  Vijay Tiwary @ Vjay Kumar Tiwary @ Vijay Kumar Tiwary
                                                        ...       Petitioner

                                          Versus

              The State of Jharkhand                  ...   Opposite Party



          Coram:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

          For the Petitioner            : Mr. Indrajit Sinha ,Adv.
                                          Mr. Ajay Kr. Sah, Adv.
          For the State                 : Ms. Vandana Bharti ,Addl. P.P.


02 / 31.01.2022

Heard the parties through Video Conferencing.

Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within two weeks after resumption of the court in physical mode.

In view of the personal undertaking given by learned counsel for the petitioner the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter are ignored for the present.

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Mango P.S. Case No. 300 of 2015 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 332, 333, 307, 295, 295(A), 153A, 435, 427, 283, 109, 114, 188 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegations against the petitioner is that he was member of an unlawful assembly being armed with deadly weapon and in prosecution of common object of the assembly, used criminal force against the police personnel and attempted to murder them and deterred them in discharging their official duty and promoted enmity between different groups on the ground of religion in violation of the prohibitory order promulgated under Section 144 CrPC. It is then submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the injury sustained by the informant are simple in nature. It is next submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation of the case and also undertakes to furnishing sufficient security including cash security hence, the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

The learned Addl. PP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, in the event of arrest by the police or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing cash security of Rs. 30,000/- and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Jamshedpur in connection with Mango P.S. Case No. 300 of 2015 subject to the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the Investigation of the case and will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will submit mobile number and photocopy of Aadhaar card at the time of surrender in the court below with an undertaking not to change mobile number during the pendency of the case along with the other conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Smita/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court