Allowed

Balku Bedia v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Oct 2020B.A./7447/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed the petitioner's bail application in a murder case. Granting regular bail was based on the petitioner's personal undertaking to remove defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter once the lockdown ends, thereby dismissing the State's opposition.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of the like amount.

Balku Bedia Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 7447 of 2020

¶2

Balku Bedia … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶3

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶4

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rishu Ranjan, Adv. For the State : Mr. Md. Hatim, Addl. P.P.

¶5

02 / 03.10.2020

¶6

Heard the parties through Video Conferencing.

¶7

Mr. Rishu Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

¶8

In view of the personal undertaking given by learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter are ignored for the present.

¶9

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Patratu (Barkakana) P.S. case no. 85 of 2019 (G.R. No. 262 of 2019) instituted under sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has murdered the deceased- the daughter of the informant. It is further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner are all false and drawing attention of the Court to the deposition of the PW4, who is the informant of the case during the trial, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in paragraph 8 of his deposition, the informant (PW4) has categorically stated that he has not seen anybody murdering the deceased and he has suspicion that the petitioner has murdered the deceased. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that P.W.5- who is the Doctor who conducted post mortem examination of the decease has reserved his opinion regarding the cause of death till the Viscera report comes

¶11

from State Forensic Science Laboratory, Ranchi and till the examination of the Doctor in the trial on 19^th December 2019, the Viscera report had not come. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 31.03.2019 hence, the petitioner may be released on regular bail.

¶12

Learned Addl. P.P. opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

¶13

Considering the facts of the case, the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Ramgarh in connection with Patratu (Barkakana) P.S. case no. 85 of 2019 (G.R. No. 262 of 2019) .

¶14

( ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

¶15

Smita/-

Balku Bedia v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balku Bedia 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

Mrs Rekha Shankar Vs Sri Kumud Kumar Jha

Mahabir Prajapati Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sadruddin Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bittu Kumar Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shahnawaz Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amit Kumar Chakrawarti Alias Amit Kumar Chakrawarty Vs the State of Jharkhand