The High Court of Jharkhand granted regular bail to a petitioner accused under Section 387/120(B) IPC after over a year of judicial custody with minimal trial progress, directing his release on a bond with two sureties.
Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties of like amount each.
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. 310 of 2020
Nipu Kumar Bauri
….. Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opposite Party
CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
For the Petitioner: Mr. Yogesh Modi For the State: Mr. Suchendra Prasad, A.P.P
05/05.06.2020 The present case is taken up through Audio/Video conferencing.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 387 IPC. However, the charge was framed under Sections 387/120(B) IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s prayer for bail was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 22.08.2019 passed in B.A. No. 4539/2019. By way of present bail application, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail primarily due to the reason that he is in judicial custody since 21.12.2018 and there is no positive progress in the trial. At least considering the length of judicial custody, the petitioner may be given the privilege of regular bail.
Learned A.P.P opposes the petitioner’s prayer for bail.
On perusal of the report submitted by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad vide letter No. 153 dated 18.03.2020, it appears that though the charge against the petitioner was framed on 28.03.2019, yet only one charge sheet witness was examined till submission of the said report.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also keeping in view the length of judicial custody, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (twenty thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Bankmore P.S. Case No. 351/2018, corresponding to G.R. No. 242/2019, subject to the condition that the
petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present before the Trial Court on each and every date, unless his physical presence for a particular date is specifically exempted by the order of the Trial Court, failing which the Trial Court is at liberty to pass appropriate order against the petitioner in accordance with law.
(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)
Satish/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted bail considering his long period of judicial custody and lack of trial progress.
What conditions should be imposed on the petitioner's release on bail.
Nipu Kumar Bauri
The State of Jharkhand
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
