The High Court of Jharkhand rejected the petitioner's bail application filed in connection with a case under Section 302 IPC, holding no reason to reconsider the earlier order. The court directed the trial court to expedite the conclusion of the trial without undue delay.
Bail application rejected; Trial Court directed to expedite the trial.
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. 8044 of 2018
Bartu Ram ….. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ….. Opposite Party -----
CORAM
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh For the State: Mr. A. K. Pandey, A.P.P -----
02/14.12.2018 The petitioner is an accused in a case for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s prayer for bail was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 09.12.2016 passed in B.A. No. 10249/2016. By way of present bail application, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail. It is further submitted that the informant of the case (the father of the deceased), namely, Bhikhari Ram has been examined as PW-4, however, he has not supported the case of the prosecution and has been declared hostile. In view of the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 29.01.2016, he may be given the privilege of regular bail.
Learned A.P.P while opposing the petitioner’s prayer for bail, submits that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased. The mother of the deceased, namely, Fekeni Devi has been examined as PW-1 and she has supported the case of the prosecution. The trial of the case is continuing and two material witnesses including the Investigating Officer are yet to be examined and as such the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of regular bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I see no reason to reconsider the petitioner’s prayer for bail in connection with S.T. No. 243/2016, arising out of Pipratand P.S Case No. 13/2015 (G.R. No. 2330/2015).
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected.
However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same without any undue delay.
(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)
Satish/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the prayer for regular bail for the accused in a murder case punishable under Section 302 IPC should be allowed considering the frequency of bail applications and lack of new submissions.
Whether the trial court should be directed to expedite the trial of the accused.
Whether the prima facie prosecution story will enable conviction so as to reject bail in non-bailable cases under Section 302 IPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bartu Ram
The State of Jharkhand
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
