This single-paragraph order considers a bail application of an accused in a dacoity case. After hearing counsel, the Bench expressed no inclination to enlarge the petitioner on bail, noting his identification in a TID parade, and rejected the prayer.
Prayer for bail is 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. 6607 of 2015 Sanjay Hazra @ Chhatru Hazra ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA -----For the Petitioner : Mr. Tarun Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. --------
05/ 01.12.2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner has been made accused for the offences under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Taratand P.S. Case No. 43 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. No. 2139 of 2014.
The case relates to dacoity and the case was instituted against unknown.
The impugned order shows that the petitioner has been identified by the informant in the Test Identification Parade.
In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Sanjay Hazra @ Chhatru Hazra, on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected.
( H. C. Mishra, J.)
Amitesh/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner warrants bail in a dacoity case where he was identified in a Test Identification Parade.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sanjay Hazra @ Chhatru Hazra
The State of Jharkhand
H. C. MISHRA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
