Gogan Yadav Alias Mahabir Mahto And Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr on 6 November, 2017

[Cites 9, Cited by 1]

Jharkhand High Court

Gogan Yadav Alias Mahabir Mahto And Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr on 6 November, 2017

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                 A.B.A. No. 5895 of 2017

            1. Gogan Yadav @ Mahabir Mahto
            2. Kamdeo Yadav
            3. Janki Yadav                                  ...        Petitioner
                                      Versus
           1. The State of Jharkhand
           2. Parmila Devi                                  ...     Opp. Parties


        Coram:    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY


        For the Petitioner            : Mr. V.K. Trivedi, Adv.
        For the State & Anr.          : Addl. P.P.

02 /06.11.2017

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 112 of 2017 (T.R. No. 796 of 2017) registered under sections 323, 341, 504, 506, 452, 380, 354 & 386 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3/4 of Witch Craft Act in which cognizance has been taken under section 323, 341, 504, 452 & 380 of the Indian Penal Code.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Addl. P.P. for the State.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners caught hold of the hair of the informant and thrashed her on ground and the petitioners along with the co-accused persons forcibly administered her night- soil and in the meantime, petitioner Kamdeo Yadav assaulted the complainant and tore her clothes and snatched silver chain worth Rs.5,000/- from the neck of the complainant. Drawing the attention of this Court to page no. 21 (annexure-3 ) of the brief, which is the copy of the certified copy of the F.I.R. of Taratand P.S. Case No. 05/2017, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners were the Panchs in the Panchayati held in connection of the said case and hence this false case has been instituted against the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioner, further, submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to pay the interim compensation to the informant -victim- Kabutari Devi. Hence, the petitioners may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the above named petitioners. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on depositing Rs. 2000/- by way of demand draft drawn in favour of Kabutari Devi, each as interim compensation for the victim - Kabutari Devi and furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Giridih, in connection with Complaint Case No. 112 of 2017 (T.R. No. 796 of 2017), subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. In case, the petitioner deposit the interim compensation amount in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Giridih, the court is directed to issue notice to the victim and release the said amount in her favour, after proper identification.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court