Bail petition lodged by accused Bhola Yadav in case under Sections 498A/304B/34 IPC was rejected as eight witnesses had been examined, with no trial conclusion requested.
Prayer for bail of the petitioner Bhola Yadav is 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. 2155 of 2018
Bhola Yadav …. …. Petitioner(s).
Versus
The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party(s) ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.
-----For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P.
02/16.03.2018
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.
The petitioner is an accused for allegedly committing offence punishable under Sections 498A/304B/34 IPC.
Without entering into the merit of the case, as eight witnesses have already been examined in this case, I am not inclined to grant privilege of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, namely, Bhola Yadav, in connection with Katkamsandi P. S. Case No. 21 of 2017, corresponding to G.R. No. 315 of 2017 (S.T. No. 202 of 2017) is hereby rejected.
Trial court is directed to conclude the trial at the earliest preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of copy of this order.
(ANANDA SEN , J)
anjali/ C.P 3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in the present case.
Bhola Yadav
The State of Jharkhand
Ananda Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
