Kamdeo Saw vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 6880 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Kamdeo Saw vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 14 November, 2025

Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

                                  ( 2025:JHHC:34289 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
               A.B.A. No. 6369 of 2025
                           ------

1. Kamdeo Saw, aged about 34 years, Son of Kago Saw,

2. Rubi Devi, Aged about 33 years, Wife of Kamdeo Saw, Both resident of Village Devpahadi, Giridih, P.O. Kharagdiha & P.S. -Deori, District -Giridih.

                                            ...             Petitioner
                                  Versus
         The State of Jharkhand         ...                Opposite Party
                                   ------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

For the Petitioners : Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Someshwar Roy, Addl. P.P.

------

Order No.02 Dated- 14.11.2025

Heard the parties.

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Deori P.S. Case No.60 of 2024 registered under sections 103/61 of the B.N.S., 2023.

The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this is the second journey of the petitioners with the prayer for anticipatory bail and earlier the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners has been rejected vide order dated 11.04.2025, in A.B.A. No. 2299 of 2025. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the fresh ground is that in the meanwhile, the elder brother of the petitioner no.1 namely Dilip Sao who faced the trial vide Sessions Trial No. 560 of 2024 has been acquitted vide Judgment dated 24.04.2025 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Giridih after police submitted charge sheet against him for having committed the offences punishable under Section 108/85/3(5) of the B.N.S.; the judgment of which has been annexed as annexure-4 at page no.32 onwards. It is then submitted that in that case, the informant was examined as P.W.5 and in para-15 she has categorically stated that there was no complaint against the petitioners. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are false. It is then submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above-named petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, 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 learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Giridih, in connection with Deori P.S. Case No.60 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish their mobile number and a copy of their Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 14.11.2025 Sonu/Gunjan-