Karan Singh @ Tinku Singh Aged About 40 ... vs The State Of Jharkhand .... .... .... ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 4223 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Karan Singh @ Tinku Singh Aged About 40 ... vs The State Of Jharkhand .... .... .... ... on 24 June, 2025

Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

                                                                   [2025:JHHC:16807]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      B.A. No.4984 of 2025
                                   ------

Karan Singh @ Tinku Singh aged about 40 years, son of Late Vijay Kumar Singh, resident of Main Road Ghatsila (Sandpura), P.O. & P.S. Ghatsila, District East Singhbhum (Jharkhand) .... .... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party

------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

      For the Petitioner         : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate
                                   Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate
                                   Ms. Supriya Dayal, Advocate
      For the State              : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl.P.P
                                       ------
      Order No.02 Dated-24-06-2025
            Heard the parties.

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Ghatsila P.S. Case No.37 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Section 308(5), 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 352, 351(2), 111(2)(b), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

Learned senior 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 was involved in chain snatching. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. Drawing attention of this Court towards Annexure-2 which is the copy of the certified copy of the compromise petition filed by the informant and the petitioner in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ghatsila in connection with Ghatsila P.S. Case No.37 of 2025, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have compromised their dispute with intervention of common friend and well wishers. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been acquitted in the case which were earlier instituted against him and the judgments of the said cases have been filed, in this case. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 29.05.2025 as is evident from para-19 of the instant bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner also undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

Considering the facts of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 the learned ACJM, Ghatsila in connection with Ghatsila P.S. Case No.37 of 2025 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case and he will not annoy or disturb the informant or witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Saroj/