Petitioner accused in murder and related cases moved for bail. Court noted co-accused granted bail and discrepancies regarding para 94 of case diary. Petitioner released on bail with bank guarantee and conditions.
Petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties on conditions.
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. 10210 of 2019
Faisal Ahmad ….. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party --------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Sr. Advocate. For the State : APP ---------
02/Dated: 13/12/2019
The petitioner has been made an accused for the offence registered under Sections 365, 302, 201, 34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
It appears that the petitioner had earlier moved before this Court for granting regular bail being B.A. No.10686/18, which was rejected vide order dated 04.04.2019 with a direction to the trial court to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order and if the trial is not concluded within stipulated period, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. Hence, this bail application has been filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and not committed any offence whatsoever alleged in the FIR. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 23.08.2018. Further submitted that co-accused Krishna Singh has been granted bail in B.A. No.1798/19 vide order dated 13.09.2019 and the case of the petitioner stands better footing.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the case is running for procesution evidence and the I.O is yet to be examined and also noted the fact that from para 94 of the case diary it is clear that on the confessional statement of the accused / petitioner the dead boy of the deceased was recovered.
Learned counsel for the petitioner produced the case diary and submitted that at para 94 of the case diary, confessional statement of co-accused, Naeem
-02-
Ansari was recorded not this petitioner and this petitioner has signed there. Prior to that in para 93 confessional statement of another accused Jidan Purty was recorded wherein he made confessed thereafter dead body, pistol and cartridges were recovered.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and period of detention, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/(Twenty Five thousands) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.J.C-IV, Ranchi, in connection with Dhurwa (Tupudana) P.S. case No. 181 of 2018, corresponding to G.R.No.4449/18 and subject to the further conditions are as follows:-
(i) Petitioner is directed to give an undertaking through his Parvikar that he will remain physically present before the trial court on each and every date fixed by the trial court till conclusion of trial and will cooperate in trial, failing which the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (ii) Petitioner is further directed that along with the bail bonds, he will furnish his Cell number and xerox copy of AADHAR Card in the court below. (iii) One of the bailors must be father of the petitioner. Let a copy of this order be sent to the court below.
(Anant Bijay Singh, J.)
Fahim /-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether petitioner accused under Sections 365, 302, 201 IPC is entitled to bail despite earlier rejection and serious charges including murder.
Faisal Ahmad
The State of Jharkhand
Anant Bijay Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
