Md. Dara Ansari …. … v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
1 & analogous cases Cr.Appeal(DB) No.1442/2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1442 of 2023 ------ Md. Dara Ansari …. …. Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1491 of 2023 ------ Bikash Kumar @ Vikash Kumar …. …. Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1472 of 2023 ------ Md. Tanvir Alam @ Tanvir @ Tanvir Alam …. …. Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1393 of 2023 ------ 1. Md. Maksud 2. Md. Asgar Ali @ Asgar Ali @ Md. Asagar Ali @ Md. Asgar Alil …. …. Appellants Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1428 of 2023 ------ 1. Md. Shabbir Ahmad Ansari @ Md. Shabbir Ahmad 2 & analogous cases Cr.Appeal(DB) No.1442/2023 2. Md. Sahid Ansari @ Md. Shahid Ansari @ Md. Shahid …. …. Appellants Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1430 of 2023 ------ 1. Arshad Alam 2. Md. Chand Ansari @ Chand 3. Md. Ashif Khan @ Ashif …. …. Appellants Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1431 of 2023 ------ Md. Mudassar Nisar …. …. Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1469 of 2023 ------ 1. Md. Shamim Akhtar @ Samir Akhtar 2. Md. Arman Ansari …. …. Appellants Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1485 of 2023 ------ Bablu Yadav …. …. Appellant Versus 3 & analogous cases Cr.Appeal(DB) No.1442/2023 The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1499 of 2023 ------ 1. Md. Riyaz Ansari @ Md. Riyaz @ Riyaz, son of Late Abbu Bakar @ Md. Abubakar Ansari 2. Md. Riyaz Ansari @ Riyaj son of Late Suleman @ Md. Suleman …. …. Appellants Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1589 of 2023 ------ 1. Ajay Kumar Bhuyian 2. Mukesh Kumar Yadav 3. Manohar Kumar 4. Dharmendra Kumar @ Dharmendra Kumar Yadav @ Dharmendra Yadav …. …. Appellants Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent With Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1642 of 2023 ------ Omkar Yadav …. …. Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent
Legal Reasoning
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR ------ 4 & analogous cases Cr.Appeal(DB) No.1442/2023 For the Appellants : Mr. Sandip Kr. Burnwal, Advocate [In Cr. Appeal(DB) No.1442/2023] : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Advocate [In Cr. Appeal(DB) No.1491/2023] : Mr. Rohan Majumdar, Advocate : Mrs. Neeharika Majumdar, Advocate [In Cr. Appeal(DB) Nos.1491/2023, 1393/2023 & 1469/2023] : Mr. Afaque Rashidi, Advocate Mr. Md. Azam, Advocate Ms. Aulia Begum, Advocate [In Cr. Appeal(DB) Nos.1428/2023, 1430/2023, 1431/2023 & 1499/2023] : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Anuj Kr. Trivedi, Advocate Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Rohit Kumar, Gupta, Advocate [In Cr. Appeal(DB) Nos.1491/2023, 1393/2023 & 1469/2023] : Mr. Raj Nandan Chatterjee, Advocate [In Cr. Appeal(DB) No.1642/2023] For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, APP [In Cr. Appeal(DB) Nos.1442/2023, 1393/ 2023 & 1589/2023] : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, APP [In Cr. Appeal(DB) Nos.1491/2023, 1472/2023 & 1485/2023] : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, APP [In Cr. Appeal(DB) No.1428/2023] : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, APP [In Cr. Appeal(DB) No.1430/2023] : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, APP [In Cr. Appeal(DB) No.1431/2023] : Mrs. Snehlika Bhagat, APP [In Cr. Appeal(DB) No.1469/2023] : Mr. V.S. Sahay, APP [In Cr. Appeal(DB) No.1499/2023] : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, APP [In Cr. Appeal(DB) No.1642/2023] ------ 09/Dated: 05.12.2023 1. All the appeals preferred under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 have been directed to be heard 5 & analogous cases Cr.Appeal(DB) No.1442/2023 together, since, the same are related with the common F.I.R. dated 01.07.2023 registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 326, 307, 353, 337, 338, 427 & 436 of the I.P.C., Section 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35 of the Arms Act and Section 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act in connection with Katras P.S. Case No.236 of 2023. 2. The aforesaid fact has not been disputed on behalf of the learned Additional Public Prosecutors appearing in the respective appeals. 3. The appellants, who are in custody in connection with Katras P.S. Case No.236 of 2023 have made prayer for regular bail by filing applications before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-VI, Dhanbad but the applications filed for regular bail have been rejected, hence, these appeals. 4. The prosecution story in brief as per the F.I.R. is that on 30.06.2023 at about 9:00 a.m., the informant got the information that one communal riots took place and people from both sides were fighting with stones, talwar etc. The Police rushed at the place of occurrence and had seen that some people fighting among themselves but after seeing the Police party, they scattered. 5. The Police, on inquiry have found that one Janardhan Yadav and his neighbours had a dispute with regard to theft of battery charger of toto (e-rickshaw) which culminated into communal riots. The scuffle took place in between both the sides and the stones had been pelted upon by both sides resulting into injury as per the allegation to the common people as also the Police Personnel gone at the place of occurrence. 6 & analogous cases Cr.Appeal(DB) No.1442/2023 6. Some of the persons have been apprehended from the place of occurrence who are the appellants herein. They have been taken into custody. 7. The Investigation commenced and the charge-sheet has been submitted against 37 persons under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 326, 307, 353, 337, 338, 427 & 436 of the I.P.C., Section 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35 of the Arms Act and Section 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act. 8. The further investigation regarding the complicity of the other co- accused persons, are going on as per the case diary. 9. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are in judicial custody since 01.07.2023 on the basis of the vague and omnibus allegation. 10. It has been contended that although in the F.I.R., reference of the injury has been referred as also such reference has been made in the case diary, but the nature of injury shown herein is simple. 11. It has further been submitted that the allegation of recovery of the deadly weapons along with explosive substance has been alleged but there is no injury caused by the deadly weapons and by the explosive, as would be evident from the nature of injury itself, which is simple in nature. 12. The Submission has been made on behalf of the appellants based upon the aforesaid ground that since the appellants are having no criminal antecedents and they are languishing in judicial custody since 01.07.2023 and further, the investigation has already been completed, hence, the aforesaid fact ought to have been taken into 7 & analogous cases Cr.Appeal(DB) No.1442/2023 consideration by the learned Court while dealing with the prayer for regular bail but having not done so, the orders impugned suffer from error and as such, the same may be interfered with. 13. While on the other hand, learned Addl. Public Prosecutors appearing in all these appeals, have vehemently opposed the prayer so made to show interference with the impugned orders. 14. The reason for making such submission is that the nature of allegation upon the appellants is serious, since, they have been apprehended from the place of occurrence with deadly weapons which were recovered from their possession. 15. The scuffle took the shape of communal riots and as such, the stones were being pelted from both the sides and when they had tried to put check upon the same, common people as also three Police Personnel had sustained injury. 16. Learned Additional Public Prosecutors appearing for the State have submitted that considering the aforesaid fact, if the learned Court while considering the prayer for regular bail, has declined to release the appellants from judicial custody, the same cannot be said to suffer from an error. 17. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone across the finding recorded by learned Court in the impugned orders as also the case diary. 18. It appears from the material available on record particularly from the F.I.R. that scuffle took place in between two groups in the locality which falls under Katras Police Station for the reason of theft of battery 8 & analogous cases Cr.Appeal(DB) No.1442/2023 charger of toto (e-rickshaw). The same was tried to be prohibited by a section of people who are of the other religion and in course thereof, the persons against whom, the allegation of theft alleged, was tried to be protected from the another group which is of another religion. 19. The scuffle has taken place which resulted into stone pelting, thereafter, Police rushed at the place of occurrence and tried to put check upon the same but the people of both the sides had aggravated, by which, three Police Personnel had also sustained injury as per the case diary. 20. Learned Additional Public Prosecutors appearing for the respondent-State have submitted by referring to the injury report that the nature of injury has been shown to be simple. 21. However, the reference of deadly weapons said to have been recovered from the possession of the appellants, but, there is no assault from the deadly weapons, since, the nature of injury is shown to be simple. 22. This Court, on the basis of the aforesaid fact, is of the view that the members of both the sides have been arrested without making any specific attributability of their omission/commission as also there is no specific allegation upon the appellants that they had assaulted causing the injury said to be simple in nature. 23. The appellants are languishing in judicial custody since 01.07.2023 and charge sheet has also been submitted. 24. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellants that there is no criminal antecedent against the appellants, which has not been 9 & analogous cases Cr.Appeal(DB) No.1442/2023 disputed on behalf of the State. 25. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the impugned orders need to be interfered with. 26. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 07.08.2023 passed in B.P. No.799 of 2023 [Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1442/2023], B.P. No.805 of 2023 [Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1469/2023], B.P. No.825 of 2023 [Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1472/2023], B.P. No.846 of 2023 [Cr. Appeal (DB) Nos.1430/2023 & 1499/2023], B.P. No.852 of 2023 [Cr. Appeal (DB) Nos.1485/2023 & 1428/2023], B.P. No.853 of 2023 [Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1431/2023] and B.P. No.875 of 2023 [Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1393/2023] by the Addl. Sessions Judge-VI, Dhanbad, is hereby quashed and set aside, so far as the appellants of aforementioned appeals are concerned. 27. Further, the impugned orders dated 18.08.2023, 23.08.2023 and 01.09.2023 passed in B.P. No.931 of 2023 [Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1491/2023], B.P. No.948 of 2023 [Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1589/2023] and B.P. No.1014 of 2023 [Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1642/2023] respectively by the Addl. Sessions Judge-VI, Dhanbad, are also hereby quashed and set aside, so far as the appellants of aforementioned appeals are concerned. 28. In view thereof, the instant appeals stand allowed. 29. In consequence thereof, the appellants, above named, are directed to 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 the S.D.J.M., Dhanbad in connection with Katras P.S. Case No.236 of 2023, subject to the conditions that the appellants shall co- 10 & analogous cases Cr.Appeal(DB) No.1442/2023 operate in the trial and shall not absent on the date fixed without any cogent cause; and shall not commit offence of the like nature. In failure, the learned court shall have liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law so that trial, be not hindered.
Decision
30. Accordingly, the instant appeals stand disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Navneet Kumar, J.) Rohit/-