In this bail application filed under Sections 439 and 440 CrPC, the High Court of Jharkhand dismissed the plea. The Court held that the trial had commenced with prosecution witnesses examined and found no change in circumstances to grant bail.
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. 6632 of 2016
Kunwar Oraon, Son of Bhadwa Oraon, Resident of Darmi Tola, P.O. & P.S.- Lapung, Distirct- Ranchi.
……..Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
……….Opp. Party
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. PATEL
For the Petitioner : Mrs. Vani Kumari, Advocate For the State : Counsel is absent.
04/Dated: 13th January,2017 Oral order: Per D. N. Patel, J.:
otherwise, there are all chances that he may not be available at the time of trial or he may temper with the evidences on record. Previously also, prayer for bail of this petitioner was rejected by a detailed speaking order, passed by this Court dated 20th June, 2014 in B.A. No. 2360 of 2014 and there is no change in the circumstances whatsoever thereafter, except efflux of time. 4. Thus, there being no substance, this bail application is hereby dismissed.
(D.N. Patel, J.)
A.K.Verma/Gunjan
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a case involving offences under the Arms Act and Indian Penal Code while the trial is ongoing?
Kunwar Oraon
D.N. Patel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
