Single judge order rejecting the petitioner's bail application for the third time. Despite arguments that the informant did not support the prosecution, the refusal was maintained due to the nature of the allegation involving brutal assault resulting in death.
Prayer for bail stands rejected once again.
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. 12376 of 2021
Gabarial Hansda ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party --CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --For the Petitioner : Mr. Sabyasanchi, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P. --- Order No. 02 Dated 13th December, 2021
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. Defects, as pointed out by the office, are ignored.
The petitioner is an accused in connection with S.T. No. 28 of 2021 [Borio (J) P.S. Case No. 523 of 2019], pending in the Court of learned Additional sessions Judge-III, Sahibganj.
The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected twice in B.A. No. 4074 of 2020 and B.A. No. 11573 of 2020.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the informant has been examined but he has not supported the prosecution case.
However, regard being had to the nature of allegations which indicates that the petitioner had brutally assaulted his mother which resulted in her death, I am not inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner, which stands rejected once again.
(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY,J.)
MK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the bail prayer of the petitioner, accused of brutally assaulting his mother to death, should be reconsidered after previous rejections.
Gabarial Hansda
The State of Jharkhand
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
