Jharkhand High Court
Sanjay Kumar Mishra vs The State Of Jharkhand .... .... ... on 13 July, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 2382 of 2023
------
Sanjay Kumar Mishra @ Sanju Mishra .... .... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... ....Opposite Party
------
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kr. Chaturvedy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, Addl.P.P
------
Order No. 04 Dated- 13.07.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Apprehending his arrest in connection with Chatra Mahila P.S. Case No. 36 of 2022 instituted under Sections 354B/504/506/379 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.
As per F.I.R. allegation against the petitioner is that he had entered into the house of the victim-lady while she was cooking food alone in her house at 08:00 p.m. and caught hold of her chest with bad intention and also took away Rs. 40,000/- which was kept for the purpose of construction of the house.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the victim- lady has taken loan for construction of house from the petitioner and on asking for returning the money, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the occurrence has taken place on 21.11.2022 and the FIR was lodged on 17.12.2022 after delay of 26 days. It is further submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he has already complied the notice under Section 41(A) CrPC. It is further submitted that petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the investigation of the case and will not indulge in tampering with prosecution evidence and will abide by all terms and conditions imposed by this Court in the matter of granting anticipatory bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and has submitted that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of heinous offence. Hence, he does not deserve anticipatory bail.
-2-It appears that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of outraging the modesty of the victim-lady by tearing her clothes and grabbing her breast. No document has been brought by the petitioner showing any money transaction or loan taken by the victim-lady from the present petitioner.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and gravity of the offence and direct complicity of the petitioner, I am not inclined to extend privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.
Petitioner is directed to surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail, which shall be disposed of on its own merits, without being prejudiced by this order.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Umesh/-