The High Court of Jharkhand rejected an application for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner in a murder case. The court held that considering the direct allegation of the serious nature of the offense, it was not a fit case to grant the privilege.
Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was 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
A.B.A. No. 249 of 2019
Dilip Kumar Rabidas @ Dilip Das … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Petitioner : Mr. M.K. Sah, Advocate For the State : Addl. P.P. ------
Order No.05 Dated- 15.03.2019
Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Godda (T) P.S. Case No.165 of 2008 (G.R. No. 530 of 2008) registered under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. P.P. for the State.
The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that petitioner committed the murder of husband of the informant namely Harahan Rawani. It is further submitted that after due investigation, police submitted final report against the petitioner and did nod sent him up for trial but he has been arraigned as an accused under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner are all false. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. drawing attention of this Court to annexure-1 at page no.5 which is an order by which the petitioner has been arraigned as an accused in this case submits that the P.Ws.1, 2, 6, 7 and 8 have categorically stated about the involvement of the petitioner in the murder of the deceased Harahan Rawani. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Considering the direct allegation of serious nature of the petitioner in the murder of the deceased this Court is of the
considered view that this is not a fit case where the above named petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )
Sonu/Gunjan-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with charges of murder.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dilip Kumar Rabidas @ Dilip Das
The State of Jharkhand
Anil Kumar Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
