Allowed

Govind Yadav v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Feb 2018B.A./9656/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted bail to petitioners accused of offenses under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and C.L.A. Act. The court noted the general nature of allegations and injury locations as grounds to release them on bail.

What did the court decide?

Directed release of petitioners on bail on furnishing bond and sureties to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

Govind Yadav 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. 9234 of 2017

¶3

With B.A. No. 9321 of 2017 With B.A. No. 9656 of 2017

¶4

Sunil Yadav...…................ Petitioner (In B.A. No. 9234/2017) 1. Shankar Yadav 2. Birbal Yadav...…................ Petitioners (In B.A. No. 9321/2017) Govind Yadav...…................ Petitioner (In B.A. No. 9656/2017) Versus State of Jharkhand. ………… Opp. Party (In all cases) …… Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen

¶5

…… For the Petitioners : Mr. A.K.Chaturvedi, Advocate Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ……

¶6

3/01.02.2018 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State, who opposes the prayer for bail.

¶7

The petitioners are accused for allegedly committing offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17 C.L.A. Act.

¶8

It is alleged that 14 named persons and 5 unknown persons, altogether 19 persons, have assaulted the deceased as a result of which the deceased died. From the FIR itself it is quite clear that there was serious land dispute between Jibodhi Yadav and the deceased as a result of which this occurrence has taken place. The weapon used in the occurrence was Lathi and the postmortem report suggests that there are five injuries on the person of the deceased out of which, two are bruises and all these five injuries are either on the hand or in the leg of the deceased. There is no specific allegation against these petitioners and the allegation is general and omnibus in nature.

¶9

Keeping in view the aforesaid fact and considering the fact that there was land dispute and injuries were on the hand or leg of the deceased, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, all the petitioners, named above, are directed to be released on bail on

¶10

-2-

¶11

furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Latehar, in connection with Manika P.S. Case No. 46 of 2017 [G.R. No. 443/2017], subject to the condition that the petitioners shall appear before the court below on each and every date so fixed in the trial and if they fail to appear even on a single date, their bail bonds shall stand cancelled and steps for taking them into custody shall be taken by the trial court.

¶12

Mukund/-cp. 3

Govind Yadav v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govind Yadav 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

Arbind Mahto Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Lal Bihari Bhagat Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanif Ansari Alias Dhawri Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Md Akbar Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Shankar Ram Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Md Intaf Ansari Alias Md Intaf Ansari Jugnu Alias Jugnu And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand