Dismissed

Amit Kumar Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC10 Oct 2018B.A./2897/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand rejected the petitioner's bail application. The judge characterized the case as being at the final stages of trial with only four witnesses remaining. Directions were issued for the trial court to conclude the trial within four months and to ensure the presence of key witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; trial to conclude within four months with dates fixed for witness examination.

Amit Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2897 of 2018

¶2

----

¶3

Amit Kumar Das … -versus-

¶4

The State of Jharkhand …

Petitioner

Opposite Party

----

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN

¶9

----

¶10

For the Petitioner : Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. For the Informant-IOCL: Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate Mr. Awanish Shekhar, Advocate

¶11

----

¶12

4/ 10.10.2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶13

Petitioner is an accused for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Sections 15(2), 15(4) of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (Amended Act 2011), Sections 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act and Sections 3/4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Properties Act, 1984, in connection with Mihijam Police Station Case No.164 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.1033 of 2017, pending in the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate at Jamtara.

¶14

During course of arguments, it transpired that charge has already been framed and only four witnesses remain to be examined in this case, out of which two witnesses are Investigating Officers and one is the Informant, who is the official of the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.

¶15

In view of the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner, abovenamed, in connection with Mihijam Police Station Case No.164 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.1033 of 2017, pending in the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate at Jamtara, is hereby rejected.

¶16

Keeping in view the stage of trial, I direct the Trial Court to conclude the trial within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶17

So far as the witness, who is official of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited, is concerned, Mr. A.K. Kashyap, learned senior counsel appearing for the informant-IOCL assures that the IOCL will ensure his presence before the Trial Court on the next date fixed in the case.

¶18

So far as the two witnesses, who are investigating officers, are concerned, the State will ensure presence and appearance of the said

¶19

-: 2 :-

¶20

investigating officers and ensure their examination within three months from today.

¶21

So far as the remaining one witness is concerned, the Trial Court will take steps to procure his appearance.

¶22

Let a copy of this order be handed over to the counsel for the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., who will communicate the same to the concerned authority of the Corporation for its compliance and let a copy of this order be also handed over to the learned A.P.P., who will communicate the same to the Officer-in-Charge concerned for compliance. This application stands dismissed.

¶23

( Ananda Sen, J.)

¶24

Kumar/Cp-03

Amit Kumar Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar Das 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

Prabhakar Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vikash Dubey Alias Bikash Dubey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jhublu Sanga Alias Binod Sanga Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anil Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand

Roshan Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Riyajuddin Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand