Ramesh v. The State of Jharkhand

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner : Ms. Aparna Dubey, Advocate : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, A.P.P. For the State Order No. 03 Dated: 09.08.2024 The petitioner apprehending his arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 120-B, 341, 342, 307, 427, 333, 353, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. As per the allegation, the informant-Sub-Inspector, Karon P.S., Deoghar along with other police officials of the said police station as well as team of police officials of Santacruz Police Station, Mumbai raided the house of Vijay Mandal in course of investigation regarding involvement of mobile no. [REDACTED] in cyber crime for which a case being C.R. No. 248 of 2024 was registered under Section 419/420 of I.P.C. read with Section 66(C)/66(D) of the I.T. Act. During search operation of the house of Vijay Mandal, the SIM of said mobile number along with three other mobile phones were recovered as well as five persons were found there in suspicious condition. They arrested the said persons and seized those mobile phones. In the meantime, 17 named accused persons including the petitioner (mentioned at serial no.-3 of the F.I.R.) along with 15-20 unknown men and 10-15 unknown women assaulted the police party, pelted stones and damaged the government vehicles.

It is further submitted that there is general and omnibus allegation against the accused persons including the petitioner. It has also not been stated in the written report as to how the informant came to know about the identity of the accused persons including the petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence and he has been implicated in the present case merely on suspicion. Other similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been stated in paragraph-12 of the present anticipatory bail application. He also undertakes to cooperate in the ongoing investigation. Hence, he may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned A.P.P. while opposing petitioner’s prayer for anticipatory bail, submits that during the aforesaid incident, the accused persons took out the magazine from INSAS rifle being possessed by a police official and damaged it. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that other similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2 A.B.A. No. 5028 of 2024

Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, in the event of his 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) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhupur at Deoghar in connection with Karon P.S. Case No. 15 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the ‘Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. Ritesh/ (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 3 A.B.A. No. 5028 of 2024