Shiv Charan Mahato Alias Chhutu Mahato v. The State Of Jharkhand
Case brief
What is this about?
Bail application by petitioner accused of dacoity and murder with a security guard was rejected. The court relied on the petitioner's confessional statement and recovery of stolen iron pipes to deny bail.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner's prayer for bail is rejected; he is not to be enlarged on bail.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 2709 of 2015 Shiv Charan Mahato @ Chhutu Mahato ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA -----For the Petitioner : M/s Ananda Sen & Nagmani Tiwari, Advocates For the State : A.P.P. --------
4/ 14.07.2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution.
The petitioner has been made accused for the offences under Sections 396 / 412 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Gamharia P.S. Case No. 44 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. No. 335 of 2013(S), S.T. No. 22 of 2014.
The case relates to murder of brother of the informant, who was working as Security Guard in the road construction company. The dead body of the deceased was found and the case was instituted against unknown.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has
been falsely implicated in this case and has prayed for bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has pointed out from the case diary that the confessional statement of this petitioner was recorded, from which, it appears that the accused persons committed dacoity in the said road construction Company, in course of which, the security guard was murdered by them and the dead body was thrown. It is also submitted that thereafter the culprits looted away the iron pipes from the construction site, which were recovered on the basis of confessional statement of the petitioner.
In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Shiv Charan Mahato @ Chhutu Mahato, on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner accused under Sections 396/412 IPC, implicated in dacoity involving murder of a security guard, should be granted bail.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Shiv Charan Mahato @ Chhutu Mahato
- respondent
The State of Jharkhand
Coram
H. C. MISHRA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Jharkhand HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- B.A./2709/2015
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court