Allowed

Chandan Kumar Gupta through His Father Upendra Sah v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC18 Jul 2016Cr.Rev./667/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi, in Cr. Revision No. 667 of 2016, allowed the revision and directed the release of the petitioner on bail. The court held that impugned orders rejecting bail were erroneous as they relied on hearsay evidence and confession without direct witnesses connecting the petitioner to the offence, leading to the directives for his release subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 10.05.2016 and 21.03.2016 set aside; petitioner directed to be released on bail with conditions.

Chandan Kumar Gupta through His Father Upendra Sah Vs the… — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. Revision No. 667 of 2016

¶3

¶4

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

¶5

For the Petitioner : Mr. Md. Faruque Ansari, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.

¶6

03/18.07.2016 Heard Mr. Md. Faruque Ansari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, learned A.P.P.

¶7

This application is directed against the judgment dated 10.05.2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Garhwa in Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 2016 by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa dated 21.03.2016 had been rejected.

¶8

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that only on the confession made by the petitioner he has been implicated. Submission has been advanced that the evidence of Puja Kumari under Section 164 Cr.P.C. seems to be hearsay and so far as the evidence of Pinki Kumari is concerned, she had also not seen the occurrence.

¶9

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer made by the petitioner.

¶10

It appears that the petitioner has been implicated on the basis of the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of Puja Kumari and Pinki Kumari and none of the said witnesses seem to be an eye-witness to the occurrence. Moreover, one of the other grounds which have been taken for rejecting the bail of the petitioner is the confession made by the petitioner.

¶11

Since there is no direct evidence to connect the petitioner with the commission of the offence and since the impugned orders have not considered these aspects of the matter, both the orders dated 10.05.2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Garhwa in Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 2016 and 21.03.2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa

¶12

-2-

¶13

are, hereby set aside and the petitioner, named above, 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 Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa, in connection with Ramna P. S. Case No. 08 of 2016 corresponding to G. R. No. 219 of 2016 subject to the condition that one of the bailors should be the father of the petitioner and who shall keep the petitioner at a safe place and will not allow him to meet any bad element and further directed to produce the petitioner before Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa on each and every date, fixed in the concerned case, till the conclusion of the inquiry.

¶14

(R. Mukhopadhyay, J.)

¶15

Umesh/-

Chandan Kumar Gupta through His Father Upendra Sah v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandan Kumar Gupta through His Father Upendra Sah 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

Bhandari Dinesh Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Pramila Soren Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suman Devi And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Kanika Banerjee Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Kunal Alias Kunal Kumar Mahto Vs The State Of Jharkhand

P S Natrajan Vs The State Of Jharkhand Through Its Chief Secretary And Anr.