KRISHNA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) The present application has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Hazaribagh Sadar P.S. Case No.17 of 2020 registered for the offences under Ss. 379, 323, 387, 386 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh.

(3.) As per the complaint petition which is the basis of this case, the complainant is the owner of a Truck bearing registration No.JH02AE 0235 (Hywa Truck) which was plying on hire and purchase. It is said that this petitioner and co-accused namely Deepchand Mahto forcibly removed the vehicle which he had purchased from Most. Soni Kumari (the widow of Sunil Prasad), who happens to be the daughter-in-law of the accused namely, Deepchand Mahto. Though the vehicle was purchased by Sunil Prasad but unfortunately, he died and the vehicle was transferred in the name of the complainant.