SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Jhk) 706

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Bhadri Devi @ Bhadi Devi - Appellant 
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent 
A.B.A. No.1574 of 2025
Decided on : 05-03-2025


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Mr. Sagar Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Subodh Kumar Dubey, Addl. P.P

The court may grant anticipatory bail when false allegations are claimed, provided petitioners assure cooperation in investigations and undertake to not disturb the informant.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 3(5), 126(2), 329(4), 115(2), 76, 352, and 351 - Anticipatory bail application - Allegations of outraging modesty related to witchcraft accusations - Petitioners allege false accusations due to prior enmity - Court granted anticipatory bail, imposing conditions of security, cooperation with investigation, and non-interference with informant. (Paras 2, 7, 10)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Anticipatory bail - Courts must consider the grounds of arrest, the nature of allegations, and the need for ensuring cooperation with the investigation and safety of the informant. (Paras 8, 10)

Facts of the case:
Appellants, neighbors of the informant, apprehended arrest under various allegations linked to witchcraft and outraging modesty, claiming false accusations rooted in previous enmity. They express willingness to cooperate with the investigation and refrain from causing further disturbance.

Findings of Court:
The court recognized the petitioners' commitment to cooperate with the investigation and affirmed their request for anticipatory bail under specific conditions to ensure the informant's safety.

Issues: Evaluating the validity of the accusations and the baselessness claimed by petitioners while considering the need for anticipatory bail amidst claimed threats and false intentions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the nature of allegations, historical enmity, and assurances provided by petitioners warranted the grant of anticipatory bail, underlining the importance of safeguarding both the accused's rights and the informant's safety.

Result: Anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners under specific conditions.

Table of Content
1. interlocutory application for anticipatory bail dismissed. (Para 1 , 2)
2. anticipatory bail application formally disposed. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. allegations against petitioners and basis for bail request. (Para 6)
4. petitioners request anticipatory bail based on allegations being false. (Para 7 , 8)
5. state opposition to anticipatory bail application. (Para 9)
6. court grants anticipatory bail with specific conditions. (Para 10)

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

I.A. No.2553 of 2025

1.Heard the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this interlocutory application has been filed for not pressing the prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner No.5 namely Debu Mahato as he has been arrested.

3. Prayer is allowed.

4. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application stands rejected as not pressed in respect of the petitioner No.5 Debu Mahato.

5. This interlocutory application stands disposed accordingly.

A.B.A. No.1574 of 2025.

6. Heard the parties.

7. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No.290 of 2024 instituted under Sections 126(2), 329(4), 115(2), 76, 352 and 351 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3/4 the Prevention of witch Craft Act, the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 and 7 is that the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons outraged the modesty of the informant and called her ‘Dian’. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 are false and general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that because of previous enmity between the parties, this false case has been foisted against the petitioners. It is then submitted that petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 and informant are neighbours. It is also submitted that the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant and their family members in any manner during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case and also undertakes to furnish sufficient security including cash security hence, the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

9. Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7.

10. Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7. Accordingly, the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 are directed to surrender in the Court below within six weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on depositing Rs.10,000/- each as cash security and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No.290 of 2024 with the condition that petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish their mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case and petitioner undertakes that they will not annoy or disturb the informant and their family in any manner during the pendency of the case and further conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top