Firoz Ansari @ Md. Firoz vs State Of Jharkhand

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No.1563 of

2011 registered under sections 302/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. P.P. for the State.

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in the murder of the

deceased â€"Idris Ansari. It is further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner are false. It is next submitted that on the basis of fardbeyan

of the wife of the deceased â€"Idris Ansari, police registered U.D. Case and in her fardbeyan before the police, the wife of the deceased stated that

the deceased committed suicide inside the forest because of her reluctance to accompany the deceased to his house. It is then submitted that the

statement of the complainant was recorded during the course of the investigation of the said U.D. Case and in paragraph no.13 of the case diary of

the said U.D. case, it has been categorically mentioned that in their statement, the complainant as well as his father stated before the police that the

petitioner and others have murdered the deceased by hanging him. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in the complaint,

the only allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is a political person who has command over the local administration and asked the

deceased to get separated from the wife of the deceased namely Sajda Khatoon and threatened the deceased of dire consequences unless he

separates from his wife â€" Sajda Khatoon. It is then submitted that there is an inordinate delay in instituting this complaint case. It is next submitted

that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as ad interim victim compensation to the complainant without prejudice to his defence in this

case and subject of final decision of the case and undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the complainant or his family members in any manner

during the pendency of the case with further condition that he will not go to or near the house of the complainant nor will tamper with the evidence of

the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above named petitioner

be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four months from the date of this order, he

shall be released on bail on depositing a demand draft of Rs.1,00,000/- as ad interim victim compensation in favour of the complainant and on

furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial

Magistrate -1st Class, Hazaribagh, in connection with Complaint Case No.1563 of 2011 with the condition that the petitioner will not annoy or disturb

the complainant or his family members in any manner during the pendency of the case with further condition that he will not go to or near the house of

the complainant nor will tamper with the evidence of the case and other conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

In case, the petitioner deposits the ad interim victim compensation amount, the court below is directed to issue notice to the complainant and hand over

the said demand draft to him, after proper identification.

At the time of conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court will pass appropriate orders regarding the amount, if any, deposited by the petitioner with

the complainant.