Allowed

Sujit Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Apr 2019B.A./319/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ranchi granted regular bail to the petitioner accused under Sections 364/302 IPC. The court quashed the error linking recovery of a motorcycle to the petitioner's confessional statement under the anticipatory bail order, noting the petitioner was already in custody and held suspicion insufficient for continued detention.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on regular bail by furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount each.

Sujit Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B. A. No. 319 of 2019

¶3

Sujit Kumar @ Sujeet Kumar, S/o Mahesh Kumar Aman

¶4

... .. ... Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand.

¶7

.. ... ...Opp. Party

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO

¶9

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, Additional Public Prosecutor For the Informant : Mr. S. B. Deo, Advocate

¶10

04 / 05.04.2019. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant.

¶11

The petitioner, who is an accused for the offence under Sections 364/302/201/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, prays for regular bail in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No. 256 of 2017.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and it has wrongly been recorded in the order rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner that motorcycle of the victim/deceased has been recovered on the basis of confessional statement of the petitioner.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further submitted that the motorcycle was recovered earlier before arrest of the petitioner, as such, such ground is an apparent error on record.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further submitted that since the anticipatory bail of the petitioner has been rejected and thereafter the petitioner has been taken into custody on 23.08.2018.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the petitioner has been charge-sheeted under Sections 364, 302, 201, 120B/34 of the I.P.C. and has three criminal antecedents, as such, the petitioner may not be enlarged on regular bail.

¶16

-2-

¶17

Considering the rival submission of the parties and since the motorcycle has not been recovered on the confessional statement of the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 23.08.2018 and has been made accused in the First Information Report on the basis of the suspicion, as such, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on regular bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-I, Seraikella, in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No.256 of 2017 and subject to the further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the learned trial court on each and every date till conclusion of the trial, failing which, the learned trial court shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

¶18

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)

¶19

Sandeep/

Sujit Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujit Kumar 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

Khoken Singh Alias Khaken Singh Alias Khokan Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Lal Mohan Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajjan Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kuldeep Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Minhaz Qureshi Alias Minhaz Quraishi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vikas Manjhi Alias Vikas Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand