The High Court at Ranchi heard a bail application in a murder case. The court rejected the prayer for bail due to the gravity of the offence, noting an extra-judicial confession. It directed the trial court to conclude the trial within three months.
Application rejected; entitled to complete the trial within three months.
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. 11134 of 2021
Beenita Devi @ Vinita Nageshiya wife of Bineshwar Nageshiya, resident of Village- Peshrar Bulung, P.O. & P.S.Kisko, District- Lohardaga.
… … Petitioner
Versus
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND ---------For the petitioner : Md. Zaid Ahmad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, A.P.P. ----------
02/ 28.10.2021 This bail application is on behalf of applicant Beenita Devi @ Vinita Nageshiya with a prayer to release her on bail in case crime being S.T. No. 140 of 2017, arising out of Bagru P.S. Case No. 12 of 2017 (District- Lohardaga), registered for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has not committed the alleged offence. It is further submitted that there is no evidence against the applicant except her extra judicial confession and the charge sheet having been filed in this case, there is no apprehension of tampering the evidence or trapping the witnesses. It is further submitted that the applicant has been languishing in jail since. 04.05.2017.
Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the contention made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that as per the First Information Report, husband of the applicant has lodged the First Information Report with the allegations that the applicant had committed the murder of his second wife by assaulting her with Tangi and stone. The learned A.P.P. has also contended that as per post-mortem report, cause of death is due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of ante
mortem injuries. The extra judicial confession was made before the informant and the persons of the village.
In view of the submissions made and also keeping in view the gravity of offence, the bail application of the applicant is hereby rejected.
As prayed by the learned counsel for the applicant, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial within three months.
(Subhash Chand, J.)
Bibha/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted in a case involving murder under Section 302 IPC where an extra-judicial confession exists.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Beenita Devi @ Vinita Nageshiya
Subhash Chand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
