Vijay Kumar Burnwal Alias Chhoti v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 Aug 2015B.A./4767/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, an accused facing armory and explosives charges, sought extension of bail and acceleration of trial. The High Court rejected the bail prayer on merit due to the petitioner's antecedents and affiliation with an extremist organization. However, the court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within six months and produce all witnesses promptly.

What did the court decide?

Trial court directed to conclude the trial within six months and produce all witnesses promptly.

Vijay Kumar Burnwal Alias Chhoti Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No.4767 of 2015

¶3

Vijay Kumar Burnwal @ Chhoti … Petitioner Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand ...O.P.

¶5

Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.N.Upadhyay

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. B.M.Tripathy, Sr. Advocate For the O.P. : APP

¶7

¶8

03/14.08.2015 The petitioner is an accused in connection with Bhelwaghati P.S. Case no.8 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. no.603 of 2014, S.T. no.292 of 2014, for the offence under sections 25(1-b)a, 26 of the Arms Act, sections 3/4/5 of Explosive Substance Act and section 17 of CLA Act, pending in the court of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih.

¶9

The petitioner has been prosecuted for having been found in possession of arms, ammunition and explosive substance like Detonator and Gelatin. Prayer for bail made on his behalf has been rejected vide B.A. no.7762 of 2014.

¶10

It is submitted that charges have been framed on 12.01.2015 and summons have been issued against the witnesses, but till date no witness has turned up, though most of the witnesses are official witnesses. The petitioner has been languishing in jail for more than one year.

¶11

Counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that prayer for bail made on behalf of the petitioner has been rejected on merit. He is having criminal antecedent, which is apparent from the F.I.R. He is active member of extremist organization known as “Bhartiya Communist Party (Maobadi).

¶12

Considering the allegation levelled against the petitioner, I do not feel inclined to reconsider the prayer. Accordingly, the same stands rejected.

¶13

However, the trial court is directed to accelerate the trial so that the trial may be concluded preferably within six months from the date of presentation of this order. It is made clear that learned APP shall give proper direction to the I.O. to produce all witnesses well within time and the learned Additional Sessions Judge shall examine the witnesses by proceeding the trial on day to day basis.

¶14

( D.N.Upadhyay, J.)

¶15

s.b.

Vijay Kumar Burnwal Alias Chhoti v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar Burnwal Alias Chhoti 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

Kunu Mardi and Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Gaurav Kumar Alias Gaurav Anand Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Sakaldev Yadav and Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Jalo Sing Alias Janardan Singh Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Anita Devi Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Ramogriv Tiwary Vs State of Bihar Now Jharkhand