Amar Kumar @ Amar Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand

The petitioner apprehending his arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 111/ 319(2)/ 61(2)/ 318(4)/ 338/ 336(3)/340(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, 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. The petitioner has been roped in this case merely on the basis of alleged confessional statement of apprehended co-accused Ajay Kumar Pandit as among those persons who succeeded in fleeing away from the place of occurrence. It is further submitted that no incriminating article connecting the petitioner with the alleged offence has been recovered by the police from the place of occurrence. Except the confessional statement of the said co-accused, there is no material against the petitioner to connect him with the alleged offence. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been stated in paragraph-15 of the present anticipatory bail application. He, however, undertakes to co-operate in the ongoing investigation. Hence, he may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned A.P.P. opposes the petitioner’s prayer for anticipatory bail.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials available on record, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

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.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Dumka in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 89 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the ‘Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’.