Binod Karmali @ Binod Mistri vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 3152 Jhar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
               A.B.A. No. 5864 of 2021
                           ------

Binod Karmali @ Binod Mistri ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party

------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

       For the Petitioner          : Mr. H.K. Shikarwar, Advocate
       For the State               : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Spl. P.P.
                                         ------
       Order No.02 Dated- 27.08.2021

Heard the parties through video conferencing. Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period is over. In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.497 of 2010 (G.R. No. 2200 of 2010) registered under sections 363/366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons has enticed away the minor victim daughter of the informant for solemnization of her marriage with Vikky Karmali. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and drawing attention of this Court to copies of the certified copies of the deposition of the judgment of S.T. Case No.100 of 2013 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Hazaribag wherein, in the said case, the principal accused-Vikky Vishwakarma has been acquitted as the witnesses including the informant has not turned up and did not support the case of the prosecution. It is then submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation of the case. It is lastly submitted that the co-accused person has already been admitted to bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned Spl. 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 petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Hazaribag, in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.497 of 2010 (G.R. No. 2200 of 2010) with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-