Dismissed

Phuphul Ram Alias Mohan Ram v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Dec 2017B.A./6552/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the petitioner's regular bail application in a criminal case involving alleged attempt to murder. Considering the trial was still ongoing with key witnesses unexamined, the court declined to release the accused on bail but directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; trial court directed to expedite trial.

Phuphul Ram Alias Mohan Ram Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6552 of 2017

¶2

Phuphul Ram @ Mohan Ram, son of Dwarika Ram, resident of Sindoor (Bhuian Toli), P.S.-Sadar, P.O. & District-Hazaribagh

¶3

... … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. -----

¶7

06/01.12.2017 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶8

The petitioner is an accused in a case registered under Sections 341/323/324/307/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with S.T. No. 239 of 2016, arising out of Sadar (Korra) P.S. Case No. 210 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 558 of 2016, pending in the court of learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh.

¶9

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the regular bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 16.01.2017 in B.A. No. 7667 of 2016.

¶10

By way of the present bail application, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for regular bail. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 26.02.2016 and there is no positive progress in the trial and, therefore, the petitioner may be given the privilege of regular bail.

¶11

The learned A.P.P. while opposing the petitioner's prayer for bail submits that the trial of the case is continuing and many material witnesses are yet to be examined. Earlier, the petitioner's prayer for bail was rejected by this Court on merit and, therefore, the petitioner may not be given the privilege of regular bail.

¶12

Earlier, a status report regarding the stage of the trial was called for from the concerned trial court which has now been received.

¶13

On perusal of the report submitted by the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh dated 16.11.2017, it appears that out of 9 charge-sheet witnesses, only 2 witnesses have been examined so far. The informant, Investigating Officer and the doctor are yet to be examined in the trial.

¶14

Considering the fact that the trial of the present case is continuing, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, hence, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby dismissed. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same without any undue delay.

¶15

Manish

Phuphul Ram Alias Mohan Ram v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Phuphul Ram Alias Mohan Ram 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Most.Kumud Jaiswal Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Vijay Kishore Pd Sinha Vs Jharkhand State Housing Board

Their Workmen Represented by Gorelal Paswan Vs Employer in Relation of Management of Bhalgora Area of Ms Bccl

Bhola Sao Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Nalin Topno Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Md Kalim Vs The State Of Jharkhand