The High Court of Jharkhand granted bail to the petitioner, an accused in a criminal case involving offenses under the IPC and Arms Act, releasing him on a bond with two sureties amid delays due to witness non-appearance.
Directed release of petitioner on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 6196 of 2012
Premanand Mahato … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD
For the Petitioner : Mr. R.S.P. Sinha, Sr. Advocate For the State : A.P.P.
2/ 01.09.2012 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.
The petitioner is an accused in a case instituted under Sections 341/323/324/307/34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this would be the fourth attempt as earlier on three occasions, prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected by this Court and that while rejecting prayer for bail lastly on 23.9.2011, order was passed that the trial be concluded expeditiously but the situation is the same as it was there on 23.9.2011, as the Investigating Officer and the doctor are not turning up for giving evidence and thereby the petitioner has been in custody since 11.11.2010 and that other co-accused namely, Panchanand Gope, who had also been alleged in the F.I.R. to have fired shot at the informant, has been admitted to bail by this Court on taking into account the evidence of P.W. 6 that he did not name Panchanand Gope as the person who had fired shot, but initially the version of the informant was that both the persons had fired shot at the informant.
Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella in connection with S.T. No. 56 of 2011.
AKT (R.R. Prasad, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, an accused in ongoing proceedings where witnesses have failed to appear, should be released on bail despite previous rejections.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Premanand Mahato
The State of Jharkhand
R.R. Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
