Mathura Prasad Chaudhary vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 597 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Mathura Prasad Chaudhary vs The State Of Jharkhand on 7 July, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                        2025:JHHC:18111


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         A.B.A. No.2048 of 2025
                                  ------
     Mathura Prasad Chaudhary, S/o late Triveni Choudhary, R/o
     village Kandalaga, PO Panjania, PS Barwadda, District Dhanbad
                                               ... ... Petitioner(s)
                                  Versus
     1.The State of Jharkhand.
     2.Binod Singh, S/o late Bacchu Pd. Singh, R/o Bhuli Nagar, PO
     and PS Bhuli, District Dhanbad       ... ... Opposite Party(s)
                                  ------
                     CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahavir Pd. Sinha, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, A.P.P.

-----

03/ 07.07.2025

Heard the parties.

2. This anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 and

484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023,

has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for

offences registered under Sections 323/341/379/387/420/406

of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of J.M., Dhanbad,

in connection with C.P. Case No. 351 of 2019.

3. Learned A.P.P. representing the State opposes the prayer

for anticipatory bail.

4. This case arises out of complaint. Since the case arises

out of complaint and cognizance has already been taken and

summons have been issued there is no question of custodial

interrogation. Thus the apprehension of the petitioner that he

will be arrested is misconceived.

5. Further offence punishable is for a period of seven years

or less, thus, this case falls within the directions given by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central

2025:JHHC:18111 Bureau of Investigation and Another" reported in (2021)

10 SCC 773 and "Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and Anr."

reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 and several orders passed by

this Court.

6. Thus, the petitioner is directed to appear before the court

concerned who will pass an order in terms of the judgment

passed in "Satender Kumar Antil" (supra).

7. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands

disposed of.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

Tanuj/Cp-3