Dismissed

State of Jharkhand v. Manik Chand Ravidas

Jharkhand HC10 Aug 2016Acq. App./52/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the State's appeal against acquittal. The Court upheld the trial court's view that the Test Identification Parade was vitiated as the accused was shown to the informant at the hospital where the injured eyewitness was being treated. The Court found no other evidence to sustain the charges of murder and culpable homicide.

What did the court decide?

The instant acquittal appeal fails; the judgment of acquittal is upheld.

State of Jharkhand Vs Manik Chand Ravidas — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Acq. Appeal No. 52 of 2004

¶3

State of Jharkhand …. …. Appellant

¶4

Versus

¶5

Manik Chand Ravidas, son of late Mohan Ravi Das, resident of Sabji Tand, P.S. Gomia, District -Bokaro …. …. Respondent

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

¶7

¶8

For the State : Mr. Krishna Shankar, A.P.P. For the Respondent : Mr. Pratiyush Lala, Adv.

¶9

¶10

6/ 10th August, 2016 Per Shree Chandrashekhar, J.:

¶11

The judgment of acquittal of the sole respondentaccused in Sessions Trial No.266 of 1996 has been questioned by the State.

¶12

On the basis of written report of one Etwa Oraon on 02.03.1996, F.I.R. being Mahuatand P.S. Case No.11 of 1996 was registered U/s 302/394 I.P.C. against unknown. The informant claims himself an eye witness. On an appreciation of the prosecution evidence, the trial court found that the respondent-accused was earlier shown to the informant in the hospital and he came for 'Test Identification Parade' in the company of police. The trial court held that the aforesaid circumstances vitiate the 'Test Identification Parade' and the accused is entitled for benefit of doubt.

¶13

We have once again re-appreciated the prosecution evidence. It is the prosecution case that several miscreants were involved in the incident, in which three bombs were thrown on the Jeep driven by the informant-Etwa Oraon in

¶14

¶15

which the deceased Dinesh Kumar was travelling. The respondent-accused is the only person apprehended by the police and he was shown to the informant at T.T.P.S. hospital where he had taken the injured for treatment. Such circumstance renders the 'Test Identification Parade' useless and it cannot be relied upon to connect the respondent-accused with the alleged crime. There is no other evidence or circumstance brought on record by the prosecution in support of charge framed U/s 302/394 I.P.C. The judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial court does not suffer from any infirmity in law.

¶16

In the result, the instant acquittal appeal fails.

¶17

(Virender Singh, C.J.)

¶18

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)

¶19

sudhir/SI ,

State of Jharkhand v. Manik Chand Ravidas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Jharkhand v. Manik Chand Ravidas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. through Its Law Officer Namely Mithlesh Kumar Vs Ranchi Power Distribution Company Ltd. and Ors.

Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. through Its Law Officer Namely Mithlesh Kumar Vs the Tata Power Company Limited Thr Its Authorized Signatory Cum Head Corporate Legal Arun Bapat And

The State of Jharkhand and Ors. Vs Binod Kindo

M/S Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited Vs Their Workmen

The Principal Secretary to the Honble Chancellor Governors Secretariat Vs State of Jharkhand Thr the Secretary Pr Secretary Deptt of Agriculture And Sugarcane Development a

Birsa Agriculture University through Its Registrar and Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand Thr the Secretary Pr Secretary Deptt of Agriculture And Sugarcane Development a