Jharkhand High Court
Niraj Kumar & Anr vs State Of Jharkhand on 7 September, 2011
Author: D. N. Upadhyay
Bench: D. N. Upadhyay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 1804 of 2011
1. Niraj Kumar
2. Sumer Roy @ Samir Kumar Roy .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
---
CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. UPADHYAY
---
For the Petitioners : Mr. S. P. Roy
For the State : A. P. P.
---
4. 7.9.2011: This application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Birni P.S. Case No.41 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 653 of 2011 registered under Sections 147, 149, 341, 342, 323, 337, 353, 379 and 504 I.P.C., pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, has been filed on behalf of petitioners, named above.
It reveals from the F.I.R. that the police party had been to the house of Awadhesh Rai in connection with Chatra P.S. Case No. 47 of 2011, but the petitioners and their associates have assaulted the police party and restrained them from discharging their official duties. the accused persons have also snatched away golden chain from the neck of the driver of the Bolero vehicle on which the police party had gone to the place.
It is submitted that the informant party did not disclose their identity and they all were in civil dress. Since they were misbehaving with the inmates, the villagers assembled there and manhandled them. In this connection, a complaint case being Complaint Case No. 405 of 2011 has also been lodged before the C.J.M., Giridih.
Learned counsels appearing for the State has opposed the prayer.
Since the police personnel were assaulted and restrained from discharging their official duty, I do not find this case is fit to be considered under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.
However, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the court below for seeking regular bail which may be considered in the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that some of the co-accused have been granted bail, without being prejudiced by this order and the application may be disposed of on the date of surrender itself.
With the aforesaid observations, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.
MK (D.N. Upadhyay, J.)