Allowed

Chamra Sinku v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC6 Jan 2020B.A./6408/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the petitioner, Chamra Sinku, accused in a murder investigation where witness statements alleged his involvement generally but lacked specific charges. Bail was ordered on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount satisfactory to the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Chaibasa.

Chamra Sinku Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6408 of 2019

¶2

Chamra Sinku ... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party ---------

¶3

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

¶4

For the Petitioner : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. V.K. Tiwary, A.P.P. ---------

¶5

05/06.01.2020 Heard Mr. Anjani Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. V.K. Tiwary, learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Hatgamharia P.S. Case No. 32/2014, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 550/2014(S), S.T. Case No. 163 of 2018, Misc. Criminal Application No. 212 of 2018.

¶6

The informant was married with Birang Kui @ Birang Sawaiyan in the year 2003. It has been alleged that on 02.09.2014 she was informed that her husband has been murdered. Laddu Hessa and Mathura Hessa had disclosed about the petitioner and others who had committed the murder.

¶7

Mr. V.K. Tiwary, learned A.P.P. for the State has referred to paragraphs 14 and 15 of the case diary which contains the statement of Laddu Hessa and Mathura Hessa who appear to be the eye-witnesses to the occurrence.

¶8

However, it appears that the said persons have disclosed the name of several accused persons but no specific allegation has been levelled against the present petitioner. Save and except the statement of Laddu Hessa and Mathura Hessa there is no other direct evidence which would indicate the participation of the petitioner in the commission of the offence.

¶9

Regard being had to the generality of the allegation as indicated above, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like

¶10

-2-

¶11

amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III at Chaibasa in connection with Hatgamharia P.S. Case No. 32/2014, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 550/2014(S), S.T. Case No. 163 of 2018, Misc. Criminal Application No. 212 of 2018.

¶12

(R. Mukhopadhyay, J.)

¶13

Alok/-

Chamra Sinku v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chamra Sinku 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

Subhash Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Anand Nag Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ghanshyam Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Enamul Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Angad Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Firoz Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand