Single bench of Justice Amitav K. Gupta refused bail to the petitioner in a bank dacoity case, holding that his complicity could not be excluded due to positive identification in a TID parade.
Bail application rejected; prayer for enlargement of petitioner refused.
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.3281 of 2016
Vijay Kumar Mahto @ Dayanand Mahto @ Vijay Mahto
….. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party ---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA
--------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : A.P.P
--------- 03/Dated: 10th August, 2016
The petitioner has been made an accused for the offence registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R neither any incriminating article was recovered from his possession. That the petitioner was put on Test Identification Parade and one of the witnesses has admitted that police had shown petitioner to him in the police station and the other witness has not assigned any specific overt act against this petitioner in the alleged commission of crime.
3. Learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that this is a case of bank dacoity and one of the witnesses has identified the petitioner as a person who was standing outside the bank. The petitioner has also confessed that in the alleged crime he was asked to keep watch outside the bank, hence, at this stage the complicity of the petitioner is made out.
4. Heard. At this stage, the complicity of the petitioner cannot be ruled out as was identified by one of the witness in Test Identification Parade, hence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
(AMITAV K. GUPTA, J.)
Chandan/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted bail in a bank dacoity case.
Whether the petitioner's complicity in the offence can be ruled out at the bail stage.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vijay Kumar Mahto @ Dayanand Mahto @ Vijay Mahto
The State of Jharkhand
Amitav K. Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
