Allowed

Bandhan Oraon v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC10 Apr 2014B.A./2339/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justice R. R. Prasad granted bail to Petitioner Bandhan Oraon, an accused in a murder case under IPC Sections 302, 201 and 34. The court noted disputed narratives regarding altercation and lack of recorded witness statements but ultimately ordered release on a security bond. No deep reasoning was provided beyond factual recording.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount each.

Bandhan Oraon Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 2339 of 2014

¶3

Bandhan Oraon ..... Petitioner(s)

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand …. Opp. Party(s)

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD

¶7

For the Petitioner(s) : M/s Vishal Kr. Tiwary,Atul Kumar, Advocates. For the State : A.P.P.

¶8

02/10.04.2014. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶9

The petitioner is an accused in a case instituted under Sections 302, 201 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it is the case of the prosecution that when the deceased had come to a place for playing gamble, some altercations took place in between the deceased and the accused persons including the petitioner as the deceased had taken some of the money of the play. The matter was pacified and thereafter, the deceased went away. After two days, when the dead-body was recovered the petitioner and other persons were made accused only for the reason that altercation had taken place during gambling, but that never suggests that it could only be the petitioner who committed murder in absence of any evidence direct or circumstantial showing culpability of the petitioner.

¶11

As against this, learned counsel appearing for the informant submits that it is true that as per the case of the prosecution an altercation took place between them, but it got pacified. Thereupon the deceased and also the accused persons left that place, but during investigation, it was found that the deceased had again come to that place and again altercation took place and that when the petitioner was arrested, he confessed his guilt.

¶12

-2-

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the State added certain facts to the effect that the villagers had seen the accused persons taking the deceased towards the pond from which the dead-body of the deceased was recovered.

¶14

However, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that though the statement is there in the case diary that the villagers had seen the occurrence, but the statement of none of the villagers were recorded and thereby, no witness is there to say that the accused persons including the petitioner were seen assaulting the deceased .

¶15

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.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Rajiv Ranjan, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.328 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No.6077 of 2013.

¶16

(R. R. Prasad, J.)

¶17

Sandeep/

Bandhan Oraon v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bandhan Oraon v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudip Sahu Alias Sudeep Sahu Alias Mangal Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Manoj Kujur Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Nelson Cherwa Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Bhimsen Pradhan Alias Bikram Pradhan Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Manoj Dutt Alias Manoj Dutt Dev Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Rajneet Mahli Alias Rajnit Kumar Vs The State Of Jharkhand