Jharkhand High Court
Bal Ram Mahto @ Balram Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand on 16 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No.3431 of 2021
------
Bal Ram Mahto @ Balram Mahto .... .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. P. P. N. Roy, Sr. Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Addl.P.P
------
Order No.03 Dated- 16.09.2021
Heard the parties through video conferencing.
Apprehending his arrest in connection with Bishnugarh P.S. Case No.104
of 2009 corresponding to G.R. No.2336 of 2009 instituted under Sections 147,
148, 149, 452, 364, 326, 302, 201, 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17
of the C.L.A. Act, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of
anticipatory bail.
Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in
committing murder of the husband of the informant. It is submitted that the
allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that though it is
alleged that the petitioner was also involved in two other cases but the
petitioner has been acquitted vide judgment dated 18.12.2017 by Judicial
Magistrate-1st Class, Hazaribag in connection with Hazaribag Sadar P.S. Case
No.22 of 2010 and in Bishnugarh P.S. Case No.08 of 2008 final form has been
submitted by the police after investigation of the case and the petitioner has not
been sent up for trial. It is further submitted that the police after due
investigation found the allegations against the petitioner not true. It is then
submitted that the petitioner is a medicine shop-owner and he has got license
and in this respect, learned senior counsel for the petitioner draws the attention
of this Court towards Annexure-2 page-16 of the brief which is the copy of the
concerned license in Form-20A. It is also submitted that the co-accused who
faced the trial, was acquitted vide judgment dated 07.07.2018 after the
informant of the case has stated in her deposition in the said trial of the co-
accused that she has not instituted the case and she does not know anything
about the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to
co-operate with the investigation of the 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 of learned J.M.-1st Class, Hazaribag within six weeks from today and in
the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail 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, Hazaribag in
connection with Bishnugarh P.S. Case No.104 of 2009 corresponding to G.R.
No.2336 of 2009 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 further conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Animesh/
