The High Court of Jharkhand rejected the petitioner's renewed bail application as the delay in trial due to the COVID-19 pandemic was not a fresh ground for reconsideration.
Bail application rejected.
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. 7929 of 2020
Dharmendra Kumar Yadav @ Dharmendra Yadav ... … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhansu Kumar Deo, Advocate For the State : Ms. Lily Sahay, A.P.P. ---------
02/12.10.2020 So far as the defect no. 5(e) is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the same once the situation normalizes.
Heard Mr. Sudhansu Kumar Deo, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Lily Sahay, learned A.P.P. for the State.
Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected in B.A. No. 1642 of 2020.
The only ground enumerated by the learned counsel for the petitioner while renewing his prayer for bail is that out of fifteen charge-sheet witnesses only two witnesses have been examined.
The trial having been stalled is understandable considering the prevalent situation arising out of COVID – 19 pandemic. The same, therefore, at this stage cannot be construed to be a fresh ground for reconsideration of the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Accordingly, this application stands rejected once again.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
Umesh/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial being stalled due to COVID-19 pandemic constitutes a fresh ground for reconsideration of bail prayer given only two out of fifteen charge-sheet witnesses examined.
Dharmendra Kumar Yadav @ Dharmendra Yadav
The State of Jharkhand
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
