Jharkhand High Court
Binod Ganjhu @ Pokhraj Ganjhu vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 10 August, 2021
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 4032 of 2020
------
1.Binod Ganjhu @ Pokhraj Ganjhu
2.Gudak Ganjhu @ Gudka Ganjhu
3.Ramchandra Ganjhu
4.Chokhan Ganjhu
5.Punam Devi ... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Binod Kr. Dubey, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Tapas Roy, Addl. P.P.
------
Order No.03 Dated- 10.08.2021
Heard the parties through video conferencing. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Simaria P.S. Case No.159 of 2019 registered under sections 341/323/ 504/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3/4 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act.
The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons called the informant a Daain and assaulted her and ousted her from the village. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to jointly pay Rs.10,000/- as ad interim victim compensation to the informant without prejudice to their defence in this case and undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case and also undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or her family members in any manner during the pendency of the case and will not cause any hindrance to the informant or her family members in residing in the village and using all the public facilities available in the village with further condition that the petitioners will not do any act, deed or thing to ostracize the informant or her family members from the village. 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 jointly depositing a demand draft of Rs.10,000/- as ad interim victim compensation drawn in favour of informant without prejudice to their defence in this case and 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 A.C.J.M., Chatra, in connection with Simaria P.S. Case No.159 of 2019 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish their mobile number and a copy of their Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case with further condition that the petitioners will not annoy or disturb the informant or her family members in any manner during the pendency of the case and will not cause any hindrance to the informant or her family members in residing in the village and using all the public facilities available in the village with further condition that the petitioners will not do any act, deed or thing to ostracize the informant or her family members from the village and other conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. In case, the petitioners deposit the ad interim victim compensation amount, the court below is directed to issue notice to the informant and hand over the said demand draft to her, after proper identification.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-