Jharkhand High Court
Vinod Kumar Singh @ Binod Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 26 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No.5741 of 2021
------
Vinod Kumar Singh @ Binod Singh
.... .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... ....Opposite Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rashmi Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.02 Dated- 26.08.2021
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 Koderma (Domchanch) P.S.
Case No. 116 of 2006 (G.R. No.172 of 2006) instituted under Sections 302, 201/34
of the Indian Penal Code, 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 in furtherance of the common
intention with the co-accused persons committed murder of the husband of the
informant namely Girdhari Sao and caused disappearance of evidence of
murder of the deceased. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner
is false. It is next submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and he
has been implicated in this case only on the basis of the statement of the
informant which is appearing in the case diary where she has only raised
suspicion against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the co-accused
persons-Parmeshwar Mahto and Naveen Mahto have been acquitted by the
Sessions Judge, Koderma in S.T. No.51 of 2007 vide judgment dated 23.11.2016.
It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with
the investigation of the case and undertakes to pay ad interim victim
compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- without prejudice to his defence in this case to
the wife of the deceased namely Girdhari Sao. 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 depositing a demand
draft of Rs.1,00,000/- as ad interim victim compensation without prejudice to
his defence in this case drawn in favour of the wife of the deceased namely
Girdhari Sao 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
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Koderma in connection with Koderma
(Domchanch) P.S. Case No. 116 of 2006 (G.R. No.172 of 2006) 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 the said demand draft, the court below is
directed to issue notice to the wife of the deceased namely Girdhari Sao and on
her proper identification, the court below shall handover the same to her
forthwith.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Pappu/
