Jharkhand High Court
Sako Yadav @ Satyendra Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 2 February, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 10869 of 2022
------
1. Sako Yadav @ Satyendra Yadav
2. Sanjay Kumar
3. Vikky Yadav @ Bipin Yadav
4. Billu Yadav @ Virendra @ Virendra Yadav
5. Nitish Yadav
6. Ram Biraj Yadav @ Rambrich Yadav... .... .... Petitioners Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Kalavati Devi .... .... ....Opposite Parties
------
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Nilesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Addl.P.P For the Informant : Mr. Vikash Anand, Advocate.
------
Order No.04 Dated- 02.02.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Apprehending their arrest in connection with Jharia (Boragarh) P.S. Case No. 130 of 2022 instituted under Sections 341/323/307/427/509/34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.
It is alleged that on the occasion of marriage ceremony, some Barat party have arranged dancing programme. Meanwhile, petitioners along with others started assaulting the Barati party and scuffle took place between them and some of the members of Barati sustained injuries.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence at all rather they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that no specific overt act has been attributed against the petitioners and no injury dangerous to life has been found on the injured and, as such, the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code is not attracted. It is further submitted that both the parties have compromised and a Joint compromise petition has also been filed in this regard. It is further submitted that petitioners undertake 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 petitioners 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.
On behalf of the informant, learned counsel appeared and conceded to the factum of compromise and the simple nature of injuries sustained by the Barati party.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation against petitioners coupled with materials available on record, I am inclined to extend privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court within four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. Dhanbad in connection with Jharia (Boragarh) P.S. Case No. 130 of 2022 with the condition that they will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish their mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Pappu/APK