Partly allowed

Ramanand Shaw And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Apr 2016B.A./1316/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

, the High Court of Jharkhand heard a bail petition by two accused in a murder case. The Court rejected bail for Ramanand Shaw based on a confessional statement admitting guilt but granted bail to Vikash Shaw after examining the evidence against him.

What did the court decide?

Bail rejected for Ramanand Shaw. Bail granted for Vikash Shaw on bond of INR 10,000 with two sureties.

Ramanand Shaw And Anr. Vs The State Of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B. A. No. 1316 of 2016

¶3

Ramanand Shaw 2. Vikash Shaw ...… Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ...… Opposite Party -------CORAM : THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA -----For the Petitioners : Mr. Ashutosh Kr. Singh, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ------

¶4

4/04.04.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for

¶5

the State.

¶6

The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Sitaramdera P.S case No. 178 of 2015 corresponding to G.R No.2710 of 2015, for the offence under Sections 302, 120-B / 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶7

The case relates to murder of the father of the petitioners and both these petitioners have been made accused in this case, alleging that they had committed the murder.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. Learned counsel has accordingly, prayed for bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has pointed out from the case diary that there are confessional statements of both the petitioners, in which, the petitioner, Ramanand Shaw has admitted that he had committed the murder of his father by sharp cutting weapon and on his confessional statement, the weapon of offence has also been recovered. The confessional statements of both the petitioners show that the deceased was assaulted to death by the petitioner Ramanand Shaw.

¶10

In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Ramanand Shaw, on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is hereby, rejected.

¶11

So far as the petitioner, Vikash Shaw is concerned, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Vikash Shaw, on bail. Accordingly, this 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 learned S.D.J.M., Jamshedpur, in connection with Sitaramdera P.S case No. 178 of 2015, corresponding to G.R No.2710 of 2015.

¶12

( H. C. Mishra, J.)

¶13

BS/

Ramanand Shaw And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramanand Shaw And Anr. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anita Kumari Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Md Irfan Siddiqui Alias Md Irfan Alias Md Irfan Siddique Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Jitu Roy Alias Jitendra Roy Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Vivek Jee Alias Vivek Yadav Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Biga Paswan Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Sudarshan Pilania Vs The State Of Jharkhand