Dismissed

Krishna Jaisawal Alias Krishna Ranjan Jaisawal v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Jul 2020B.A./2210/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a murder case under Section 302 IPC, the High Court of Jharkhand considered the bail application of the appellant who owed a huge sum to the deceased. Finding strong circumstantial evidence and a clear motive based on financial dues, the court rejected the bail petition.

What did the court decide?

Bail application of the petitioner was rejected.

Krishna Jaisawal Alias Krishna Ranjan… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.2210 of 2020

¶2

¶3

Krishna Jaiswal @ Krishna Ranjan Jaiswal.……Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand …..Opposite Party

¶4

¶5

Coram: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

¶6

---------For the Petitioner : Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate For the State : Mr. Deepak Kumar, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, Advocate -----

¶7

05/3.7.2020 Heard Mr. B.M. Tripathi, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State assisted by Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, learned counsel appearing for the Informant.

¶8

Petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Harla P.S. Case No. 83 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. No. 1084 of 2010 (S.T. Case No.394 of 2019).

¶9

It has been alleged that on 13.8.2020, the son of the informant left for Ranchi from Dhanbad. On the same day at about 11.00 am wife of the driver informed that her husband and the son of the informant were shot at by unknown miscreants. Both were found to be in the hospital in a serious condition. Suspicion was cast upon the petitioner for orchestrating the murder since the petitioner had to pay to the son of the informant several lacs of rupees due to business transactions. The son of the informant Shashi Kant Singh had subsequently died.

¶10

On going through the case diary the statement of the wife of the deceased namely Sudha Rani Singh is contained in paragraph-4 wherein she has stated that her husband had a due of Rs.15 lacs from the petitioner and the petitioner was not intending to return the amount. She has further stated that several SMS were sent by her husband to the mobile of the petitioner. Subodh Singh, the brother in law of the deceased, had also stated in similar terms and which has been recorded at paragraph 33 of the case diary. Similar is the statement of Rana Pratap Singh who is the neighbor of the deceased which is at paragraph-34 of the case diary. In paragraph-36 of the case diary, one Vidyanand Singh had disclosed that the petitioner had stated just before leaving for Ranchi that he was going to Ranchi to collect the money

¶11

The 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the informant is at paragraph 75 of the case diary wherein he has referred to several SMS sent by the deceased to the petitioner. Paragraph 92 of the case diary contains the statement of Pental @ Pintu who was the driver of the vehicle and he has described how the incident had taken place.

¶12

-2-

¶13

It appears from paragraph 113 of the case diary which is a deed of agreement that 13.5 acres of land was sold to the deceased by the petitioner. The seizure list which is at paragraph 204 of the case diary indicates about a paper which reveals that an amount of Rs.1.50 crores was due from the petitioner.

¶14

The investigation has revealed about a strong motive of the petitioner in doing away with the life of the deceased since a huge amount was due from the petitioner. The statements of the witnesses and the documents which have been seized by the Investigating Officer do point to a strong circumstance regarding the involvement of the petitioner in committing the murder of the son of the informant. In such facts situation, therefore, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, which is, hereby, rejected.

¶15

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J)

¶16

Umesh/-

Krishna Jaisawal Alias Krishna Ranjan Jaisawal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Jaisawal Alias Krishna Ranjan Jaisawal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Kumar Chandra Alias Ajoy Kumar Chandra Vs the Union of India through CBI

Suresh Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sk Chutu Alias Safuddin Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ravi Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Lal Bahadur Alias Chhote Lal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Uttam Kr Sah Vs the State of Jharkhand