The High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi dismissed regular bail applications filed by six accused persons (five in B.A. No. 3948 of 2018 and one in B.A. No. 3641 of 2018) in a case involving serious injuries and deaths under the IPC.
Bail applications in B.A. No. 3948 of 2018 and B.A. No. 3641 of 2018 stood 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. 3948 of 2018
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jorong Jedan Sanga, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. …......
08/18.09.2018
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.
The petitioners are accused for allegedly committing an offence punishable under Sections 147,148,149,302,307,341 and 342 of the IPC.
Counsel for the petitioners submits that informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. He submits that two other injured victims have also not taken the name of these petitioners. He submits that other accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail.
After going through the FIR and record, I find that petitioners are named in the FIR. There is an allegation against these petitioners that father, mother and sister of the informant was mercilessly beaten by the persons named in the FIR and other accused persons. They sustained severe injury. Even the accused person did not allow to give them water later on they died. Two other sisters of the informant were admitted in the hospital in serious condition.
After considering submissions of the parties, I find that several other named accused persons have filed bail application and this Court has also dismissed the regular bail application of named accused person. Thus, the bail application of the petitioners namely Shanti Devi, Anima Kumari @ Phogni Kumari @ Phogan Kumari, Sunita Kumari @ Sarita Kumari and Sunita Kerketta ( in B.A. No. 3948 of 2018) in connection with Palkot Police Station Case No. 90 of 2017 (G.R. No. 1180 of 2017), pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gumla stands rejected.
-2-
The bail application of the petitioner namely Karmi Dungdung ( in B.A. No. 3641 of 2018) in connection with Palkot Police Station Case No. 90 of 2017 (G.R. No. 1180 of 2017), corresponding to S.T. No.119 of 2018 pending in the court of learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Gumla also stands rejected.
(ANANDA SEN, J)
anjali/ C.P 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail applications of the petitioners in connection with the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 341, and 342 of the IPC should be allowed or rejected.
Whether the fact that the informant is not an eyewitness or that other injured victims did not name the petitioners would justify granting bail.
Shanti Devi
Anima Kumari @ Phogni Kumari @ Phogan Kumari
Sunita Kumari @ Sarita Kumari
Sunita Kerketta
Karmi Dungdung
State of Jharkhand
Ananda Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
