Kapil Kumar Mandal @ Kapil Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 1375 Jhar

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                  A.B.A. No. 10753 of 2022

     1. Kapil Kumar Mandal @ Kapil Mandal

     2. Gurudeo Kumar @ Tuntun Kumar @ Gurude Kumar @ Tuntun Mandal

     3. Sunil Mandal

     4. Munil Mandal @ Johan Mandal @ Jevan Mandal
     5. Sanjay Mandal                              ...... Petitioners
                                      Versus
     The State of Jharkhand                        ......Opposite party
                                      ----------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

-----

For the Petitioners : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, A.P.P.

.....

Order No.03/ Dated:28.03.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Apprehending their arrest in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No.162 of 2018(G.R. No.313 of 2020) instituted under Sections 323/ 324/ 341/ 325/ 307/ 379/ 504/ 506/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioners have moved to this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

As per F.I.R, allegation is that informant along with his son namely Chandan Kumar went to Ghormara by his motorcycle for cleaning the shrubs suddenly the accused persons came there and started assaulting badly due to which informant sustained injuries on head and fell down.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence at all rather they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that admittedly there is land dispute between the parties. It is submitted that after investigation police has submitted charge sheet under Sections 323, 341, 325, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and thereafter learned court below has taken cognizance under Section 323, 341, 307, 325, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to a decision rendered in the case of Dinesh Kumar Versus The State of Jharkhand, reported in 2011(3) East Cr. C. 430 (Jhr), wherein it has been held as follows:

" I have gone through the documents placed before me. Since the petitioner had appeared before the police and he was on police bail and even after submission of charge sheet only notice has been issued for securing his appearance, I do not feel that present anticipatory bail application is maintainable. If the petitioner was previously on bail, only because cognizance has been taken for the offence which are non- bailable, bail should not be refused. If he appears before the Court after receiving notice or summon. At this juncture, I also intend to mention another aspect in which the accused persons are released on bail under section 436 Cr.P.C. In a case registered for bailable offence and subsequently if charge sheet is submitted against them for non-bailable offences and on being summoned, if they appear before the court, bail should not be refused or cancelled only because cognizance has been taken under non-bailable sections."

In such circumstance, it has been prayed that the petitioners be directed to be released on bail.

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

In view of the judgment referred above as well as the order passed in A.B.A. No. 3041 of 2012, this anticipatory bail application is not maintainable.

However, taking a cue from the judgment referred above, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below and pray for regular bail within a period of four weeks from today and if they do so they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Deoghar in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No.162 of 2018(G.R. No.313 of 2020).

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) R.K/