Santosh Kumar Sahu @ Santosh Sahu vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 3776 Jhar

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                 A. B. A. No. 4915 of 2023
            1. Santosh Kumar Sahu @ Santosh Sahu
            2. Yogendra Prasad Sahu @ Juga Sao @ Yogendra Sao      ..... Petitioners
                                           Versus
            The State of Jharkhand                                 ..... Opposite Party
                                             -----

CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

-----

            For the Petitioners:       Mr. Pradeep Modi
            For the State:             Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, A.P.P
                                            -----

05/06.10.2023     Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with the case

registered under Sections 302/34/379 IPC and Section 17 of Criminal Law

Amendment Act have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had

earlier moved this Court for grant of anticipatory bail by filing A.B.A. No.

2677/2012 which was dismissed vide order dated 25.09.2012 directing them to

surrender before the Court below within four weeks from the date of the said

order to seek regular bail which was to be considered on merit without being

prejudiced by the said order. However, they did not surrender before the

concerned Court below due to ignorance and remained in their village. In the

meantime, co-accused Triveni Sao faced the trial in S.T. No. 59/2008 and was

acquitted vide judgment dated 21.07.2023 passed by the learned Additional

Sessions Judge, FTC-II, Latehar. Another co-accused Shiv Ram Mochi @ Shiv

Ram also faced the trial in S.T. Case No. 168/2013 and was acquitted vide

judgment dated 29.01.2020 passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions

Judge-I, Latehar. Since the petitioners are innocent and there is omnibus

allegation against them, they may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned A.P.P while referring to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of

the State, submits that the FIR in question was lodged under Sections

379/302/34 IPC as well as Section 17 of Criminal Law Amendment Act against

the petitioner and the other members of extremist organization with an

allegation that they armed with guns etc. killed the wife of the informant and looted Rs.1,25,000/-. During investigation, the informant made an application

for deleting the name of the petitioners as accused, however, it subsequently

came to light that the said application was submitted on the pressure of

members of the extremist organization. The said fact has been recorded in

paragraphs 79 & 80 of the case diary. On investigation, the case was found true

against the petitioners and chargesheet No. 125/2009 was also submitted

against them on 16.09.2009 under Sections 147/148/149/380/302/452 IPC. It is

further submitted that the petitioners have already been declared permanent

absconders after following due procedure of law and they are still evading their

arrest.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case particularly

that the petitioners have been declared permanent absconders as well as

keeping in view the gravity of offence alleged against them, I not am inclined to

enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

The petitioners' prayer for anticipatory bail is accordingly dismissed.

Satish/-                                                              (RAJESH SHANKAR, J)