Justice Rajesh Shankar rejected a bail application filed by Santosh Singh, an accused in murder and arms offences. The Court held that despite petitioner's lengthy custody and incomplete charge-sheet, repeated prior rejections preented further relief.
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.10523 of 2020
Santosh Singh ..... … Petitioner
Versus
State of Jharkhand …. …. Opposite Party
-------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR -----For the Petitioner : Mr. Sabyasanchi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, A.P.P.
03/22.01.2021 The present bail application is taken up today through Video conferencing.
The petitioner is an accused in connection with S.T. No.246 of 2014 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Garhwa.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s applications for regular bail were earlier rejected by this Court four times. By way of present bail application, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for regular bail, on the ground that he is in judicial custody since 25th January, 2014 and only nine charge-sheet witnesses out of twelve have been examined. It is further submitted that at least considering the length of judicial custody, the petitioner may be given the privilege of regular bail.
Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State while opposing the petitioner’s prayer for regular bail submits that since the petitioner’s bail applications have already been rejected by this Court four times earlier, he does not deserve the privilege of regular bail.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner’s application for bail is, hereby, rejected.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Rohit
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner deserves regular bail considering the repeated rejections of his earlier applications.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Santosh Singh
State of Jharkhand
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
