Bail application by a petitioner accused of dacoity under Section 395 IPC was heard. The High Court, relying on earlier rejection and identification in TIP, rejected the renewed 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.6655 of 2015
Sayeed Hassan Khan @ Sayeed Ranger @ Sayeed Khan
..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
…. Opposite Party
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Thakur For the State : A. P.P.
4/04.01.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Kotwali (Pandra) P.S. Case No.768 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No.4796 of 2013, S.T. No.299 of 2014.
The case relates to dacoity and in view of the fact that the petitioner had been identified in TIP, earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on merits by order dated 15.4.2014 in B.A. No.465 of 2014.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has renewed the prayer for bail.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail stands rejected.
(H. C. Mishra, J)
R.Kumar
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner accused of dacoity under Section 395 IPC is entitled to be released on bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sayeed Hassan Khan @ Sayeed Ranger @ Sayeed Khan
The State of Jharkhand
H.C. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
