Jharkhand High Court
Manoj Saw vs The State Of Jharkhand .... .... ... on 14 September, 2021
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No.6714 of 2021
------
Manoj Saw .... .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... ....Opposite Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rishi Raj Verma, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.02 Dated- 14.09.2021
Heard the parties through video conferencing.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.
In view of personal undertaking given by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.
Apprehending his arrest in connection with Nimiaghat P.S. Case No. 111 of 2015 instituted under Sections 461, 379, 414, 201, 427, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and later on Section 411 of I.P.C. was added, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with the co-accused person where committing theft of ATM machine of State Bank of India and damaged the same with the use of crowbar and other implements but with the arrival of the police they fled away by leaving the said ATM machine which was broken and damaged. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that there is insufficient material in the record to implicate the petitioner in this case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case and undertakes to deposit Rs.5,00,000/- with State Bank of India, Pordag Branch in the District of Giridih without prejudice to his defence in this case subject to final decision of this case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, the petitioner will be enlarged on bail on showing proof of depositing Rs.5,00,000/- with State Bank of India, Pordag Branch in the District of Giridih without prejudice to his defence in this case and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M.1st Class, Giridih in connection with Nimiaghat P.S. Case No. 111 of 2015 with the condition that he will co- operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his 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.
In case the petitioner deposits Rs.5,00,000/-, learned court below will pass an appropriate order regarding the same at the time of conclusion of trial.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Pappu/