This bail application was filed by accused persons facing charges including murder and conspiracy. The court, after hearing counsel, found no ground to release them and rejected the prayer for bail.
Prayer for bail stands rejected.
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.534 of 2015
..... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
…. Opposite Party
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Sharma Mr. Mithilesh Singh For the State : A. P.P.
2/8.04.2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
Petitioners have been made accused for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 326, 332, 333, 353, 379, 396, 427, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act, in connection with Kathikund P.S. Case No.55 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No.991 of 2013.
From the FIR, it appears that the police party was ambushed by the members of the extremists group and in the occurrence, the then S.P. of Palamau and several other police personnel were murdered.
The involvement of petitioners has also been found during investigation.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail stands rejected.
(H. C. Mishra, J)
R.Kumar
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners, accused of including murder and criminal conspiracy, should be released on bail.
Whether bail should be granted in the given facts and circumstances.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Manvel Murmu
Manbel Murmu
The State of Jharkhand
H. C. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
