The High Court of Jharkhand, dealing with an application for bail by an accused under Section 302/34 IPC who had absconded, rejected the prayer for bail based on the prosecution's submission.
Bal was rejected and the petitioner was not released on 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. 2809 of 2018
Anil Choudhary ... Petitioner(s).
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party(s).
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN .
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepankar, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P.
06/10.10.2018: The petitioner is an accused for the offence punishable under Section(s) 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Taljhari P.S. Case No. 10/2011, corresponding to G.R. No. 95/2011 (S.C. No. 141/2013), pending in the court of learned Addl. District Judge-I, Rajmahal.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argues at length.
Learned A.P.P opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner was an absconder, which is apparent from the supplementary case diary.
In view of the submission of the learned A.P.P, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, above named, is rejected at this stage.
(ANANDA SEN, J.)
Anu/-C.P.-3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, an accused charged with murder and an absconder, should be released on bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anil Choudhary
The State of Jharkhand
Ananda Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
