Nawal Prasad Chaurasiya vs The State Of Jharkhand. ... ... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 4263 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Nawal Prasad Chaurasiya vs The State Of Jharkhand. ... ... Opposite ... on 25 June, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                          2025:JHHC:16874


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                          A.B.A. No.63 of 2025
                                   ------
     1.    Nawal Prasad Chaurasiya
     2.    Shashibhushan Prasad @ Shashi Bhushan Prasad @
           Shashibhushan Prasad Chaurasiya
     3.    Mahendra Chaurasiya @ Mahendra Paswan
     4.    Mrityunjay Kumar Tiwari
                                          .       ... ... Petitioners
                                  Versus
     The State of Jharkhand.                  ... ... Opposite Party
                                 WITH
                         A.B.A. No.7981 of 2024
                                   ------
     1.    Navneet Kumar Pandey @ Nawnit Kumar Pandey @ Navneet
           Kuar Pandey
     2.    Md. Asraf Karim @ Mohammad Ashraf Karim @ Ashraf Karim
                                          .       ... ... Petitioners
                                  Versus
     The State of Jharkhand.                  ... ... Opposite Party

                                 ------
                      CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. LCN Shahedeo, Advocate Mr. Yash Raj Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Someshwar Roy, A.P.P. Mr. Bishambhar Shastri, Advocate Mr. P.S. Bajaj, Advocate Mr. Suraj Singh, Advocate

-----

05/ 25.06.2025

Heard the parties.

2. These Anticipatory Bail Applications under Section 482

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

been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in

connection with Complaint Case No.1264 of 2021, for offences

under Sections 406, 420, 409, 120(B) and 34 IPC. The cases are

presently pending before the Court of learned C.J.M. at Garhwa.

3. These cases arise out of a complaint case. Further,

cognizance has been taken in these cases.

4. Since these cases arise out of a complaint case and

cognizance has already been taken, there is no question of 2025:JHHC:16874

custodial interrogation. The only fact which the Court has to be

assured of is whether the accused will face the trial or not or

whether there is any chance of tampering with the evidence.

5. The impugned order does not suggest any of the

aforesaid situation. The petitioners are directed to surrender and

appear before the Court below and the learned Court below shall

consider the case of the petitioners taking into consideration the

judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

6. With the aforesaid direction, these Anticipatory Bail

Applications stand disposed of.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

Prashant. Cp-3