RAGHO YADAV v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Court: High Court of Jharkhand
Bench: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Jharkhand judgment dated 2024-12-11. RAGHO YADAV v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 3269 of 2024 ----- 1. Ragho Yadav @ Ragho Jadav, S/o Suga Yadav 2. Chandan Kumar Yadav, S/o Fuleshwar Yadav 3. Dinesh Kumar Yadav, S/o Shankar Yadav 4. Basant Kumar Yadav, S/o Radho Yadav 5. Shankar Yadav, S/o Bira Yadav .......... Petitioners. -Versus- The State of Jharkhand .......... Opp. Party. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Aditya Kr. Jha, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, APP ----- Order No. 09 Date: 11. 12. 2024 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner th no. 6- Suneshwar Yadav has died on 30 May, 2024 during pendency of the present anticipatory bail application. Hence, he may be permitted to delete the name of the petitioner no. 6 from the cause title of the said bail application. 2. Permission is accorded. 3. Necessary deletion in the cause title of the present anticipatory bail application be made by the counsel for the petitioners. 4.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Sections 306 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and have not committed any offence as alleged. All the petitioners are family members. In fact, the daughter of the petitioner no. 1, namely, th Kiran Devi died on 9 September, 2023 under suspicious circumstance for which a case being Lesliganj P. S. Case no. 96 of 2023 was lodged by the petitioner no. 1 against the informant and his family members for the offence under Sections 304B, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The present case has been lodged by the informant in retaliation of the said case. Even during investigation, except the statement of the informant and his family members, no corroborative material has surfaced so as to substantiate the allegation that the petitioners abated the informant’s son- Dhirendra Yadav to commit suicide.
The petitioners, however, undertake to co-operate in ongoing investigation of the case. Hence, they may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. 6. Learned A. P. P. opposes the petitioners’ prayer for anticipatory bail. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners, above named, on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, in event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within three weeks from today, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand), each, with two sureties of the like amount, each, to the satisfaction of learned st Judicial Magistrate, 1 Class, Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Lesliganj P. S. Case no. 110 of 2023, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr. P. C. (Rajesh Shankar, J. ) Sanjay/ -2- A. B. A. No. 3269 of 2024
Source: High Court of Jharkhand. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.