Allowed

Mahesh Oraon v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC20 Jul 2018B.A./3333/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted regular bail to the petitioner, an accused of murder under Section 302 IPC and Arms Act, who had been in judicial custody for over two years. The court noted a significant delay in the trial as no prosecution witnesses had been examined beyond the doctor since March 2017. Bail was granted subject to a bond of Rs. 20,000 and two sureties, with strict conditions t

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with bond of Rs.20,000 and two sureties of like amount, subject to cooperation and presence in court.

Mahesh Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 3333 of 2018

¶3

Mahesh Oraon …Petitioner -V e r s u s-

¶4

The State of Jharkhand ...Opp.Party

¶5

CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶6

For the Petitioner : - Miss Sunita Kumari, Advocate, For the State :- Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.

¶7

06/20.07.2018

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

Petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.01.2017 in B.A. No. 5518 of 2016 primarily on the ground that the trial was at crucial stage. Accordingly, the trial court was directed to make all possible endeavours to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible by ensuring the attendance of remaining prosecution witnesses. It is further submitted that after rejection of the petitioner’s bail application vide order dated 13.01.2017, only the doctor has been examined as P.W. 3 on 06.03.2017 and thereafter no witness has been examined till date. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 28.12.2015 and, therefore, he may be given the privilege of regular bail.

¶11

Learned A.P.P. opposes the petitioner’s prayer for bail.

¶12

On perusal of the report submitted by the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge- V, Gumla dated 26.05.2018, it appears that no prosecution witness has been examined after 06.03.2017.

¶13

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Gumla in connection with Sessions Trial no. 263 of 2013 arising out of Raidih P.S. Case no. 63 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. No. 832 of 2011 subject to the condition that the petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present before the trial court on each and every date fixed in the trial unless his physical presence is specifically exempted by the order of the trial court, failing which the trial court is at liberty to pass appropriate order against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶14

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶15

Ritesh

Mahesh Oraon v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Oraon 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

Ranjeet Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Ms M a Enterprises through Minhas Asghar Ansari Vs State of Jharkhand Thr Pr Secretary Health Medical Education and Family Welfare Deptt and Ors.

Ms Royal Mittal a Joint Ventrue Through Its Legal Manager Sudip Bhowmick Vs East Central Railway Through Its Chief Engineer And Ors.

Mausam Kumar And Ors. Vs The Union Of India The Ministry Of Human Resource And Development Th The Joint Secretary And Ors.

Jay Mangal Kumar Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pradeep Tiwary Alias Pradeep Kumar Tiwary Vs the State of Jharkhand