Single-judge High Court of Jharkhand dismissed bail applications in a bank dacoity case. The court declined to grant bail as the trial had not commenced and the informant had not yet been examined to testify against the accused.
Prayer for bail of the petitioners was rejected; liberty granted to renew prayer after examination of the informant.
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. 6084 of 2018 WITH B.A. No.5504 of 2018
Sukra Tirkey …
Petitioner [in BA 5504 of 2018]
-versus-
The State of Jharkhand
… Opposite Party [in both cases] ----
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
----
For the Petitioners : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Deepak Kumar, A.P.P. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, A.P.P.
----
6/ 30.11.2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is an accused for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Sections 395 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Chaibasa (Muffasil) Police Station Case No.129 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.599 of 2017, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners were not named in the FIR. Chargesheet has already been submitted and petitioners were not put on Test Identification Parade. Money which has been recovered being a common article belongs to the petitioners and cannot be related with the crime.
Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that on the basis of confessional statement, money was recovered.
After hearing the parties, I find that this is a case of bank dacoity wherein six unknown persons entered the bank with arms and weapons and robbed cash amounting to more than Rs.3,50,000/-. Informant, who happens to be the Bank Manager clearly stated that he can identify the accused persons.
Since the trial is yet to begin and informant is yet to be examined in this case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioners, namely, Gwala Singh Bankira, Juriya Deogam @ Chiriya Deogam (petitioners in B.A. No.6084 of
-: 2 :-
Petitioners, if so advised, are given liberty to renew their prayer for bail after examination of the informant during trial.
This application stands dismissed.
( Ananda Sen, J.)
Kumar/Cp-03
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail ought to be granted to petitioners in a dacoity case pending trial before the bail application is adjourned for the examination of the informant.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gwala Singh Bankira
Juriya Deogam @ Chiriya Deogam
Sukra Tirkey
The State of Jharkhand
Ananda Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
