Single Judge of Jharkhand High Court rejected bail application of accused facing murder charge. Trial imminently concluding; bail ordered if trial delays beyond October 2016.
Rejected bail application, but ordered trial court to release petitioner on bail if trial not concluded by October 2016.
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. 3482 of 2016 Dwarika Sao ……..Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ………. Opposite Party --------CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kr. Chaturvedy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Deepak Kumar, A.P.P.
04/Dated:11th August, 2016
The petitioner has been made accused for the offence registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is no material evidence on record. It would be evident from Annexures-1, 2, 3, and 4 i.e., the deposition of the witnesses examined during trial that P.Ws 1 and 2 have been declared hostile, whereas, P.W.3 is uncle and in crossexamination, he has admitted that he is a hearsay witness. It is submitted by the counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case by the informant. In fact, the deceased had fallen in the well when she had gone to fetch water. It is urged that no injuries were found on the body of the deceased in the post-mortem report.
Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that it would be evident that the trial court has reported that the trial is likely to be concluded within three months. That the informant’s wife along with her son had died and it is alleged that the petitioner had pushed her in the well.
Heard. It is evident from the status report that the court below has stated that the trial is likely to be concluded within three months. Thus, at this stage I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, hence, the prayer for bail is hereby rejected.
However, if the trial is not concluded by the end of October, 2016, the trial court shall pass order for release of the petitioner on bail on merit on terms and conditions, which the trial court deems fit and proper to impose.
(Amitav K. Gupta, J.)
Tarun/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, accused of murder under Section 302 IPC, is entitled to bail given the anticipated short duration of the trial and evidence suggesting false implication.
Whether the objections raised regarding hostile witnesses and lack of post-mortem injuries warrant bail at this stage.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dwarika Sao
The State of Jharkhand
AMITAV K. GUPTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
