SUNITA DEVI ALIAS ANITA DEVI 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 2024-12-07. SUNITA DEVI ALIAS ANITA DEVI 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. 7622 of 2024 1. Sunita Devi @ Anita Devi wife of Mithlesh Hazra @ Mithlesh Kumar 2. Gendiya Devi wife of Rama Hazra 3. Jugli Devi wife of Sajan Hazra 4. Aarti Devi wife of Sudhir Hazra 5. Lalwa Devi @ Lalita Devi wife of Sanjay Kumar Yadav 6. Ajhola Devi wife of Rajendra Hazra 7. Sonu Yadav @ Vikash Kumar son of Rupu Yadav 8. Punita Devi wife of Chandradeo Hazra 9. Sugiya Devi wife of Gopal Hazra All are residents of Village Khariyodih, P. O. - Ghoranji, P. S. - Deori, District- Giridih … … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand …. … Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioners : Mr. Anjani Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Bandana Sinha, A. P. P. Order No. 03 Dated: 07. 12. 2024 The petitioners apprehending their arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 147/149/188/224/225/341/332/353/117 of the Indian Penal Code, have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail. 2.
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 in the F. I. R. It has been alleged that the petitioners and other named accused persons as well as 10-15 unknown persons obstructed the informant and the police party in arresting one Pradeep Hazra whose house was raided by the police party. It has also been alleged that the petitioners and other co-accused persons scuffled with the police party, abused them and tried to snatch the official pistol of the informant. They also got Pradeep Hazra freed from the police custody. In fact, the petitioners were not involved in committing the alleged offence. They have been roped in this case merely due to the reason that they are the family members/relatives of co-accused Pradeep Hazra. It has also not been specified as to how the informant could know about the identity of the petitioners.
The petitioners, however, undertake to cooperate in the ongoing investigation. Hence, they may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. 3. Learned A. P. P. opposes the petitioners’ prayer for anticipatory bail. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials available on record, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. 5. Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, in the 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 Judicial st Magistrate-1 Class, Giridih in connection with Deori P. S. Case No. 38 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the ‘Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. Ritesh/ (Rajesh Shankar, J. ) 2 A. B. A. No. 7622 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.