In a bail application under Section 302/201 IPC for a love-marriage murder, the Court rejected bail due to the gravity of the offence and the recovery of the blood-stained axe from the petitioner's premises.
Bail prayer rejected and trial directed to be expedited.
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
[CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION]
B.A. No. 5742 of 2021
Sk. Faquruddin @ Rajesh …… Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Opposite Party ----CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Awnish Shankar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, A.P.P. -----
03/Dated: 04/10/2021:
Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Awnish Shankar, and learned counsel for the State, Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, A.P.P.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has prayed for grant of bail in connection with Mosabani P.S. Case No. 42 of 2020, for the offence registered under Sections 302/201 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per FIR petitioner has solemnized love marriage with the deceased and on 19.06.2020 he has killed his wife by axe.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that quarrel between wife and husband is a very common thing, but petitioner has not committed any offence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that from perusal of the seizure list, it appears that blood stain axe used in commission of the offence has not been recovered from the house of the petitioner rather it has been recovered from the open place accessible to all the persons and petitioner is in custody since 20.06.2020, as such, petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioner is husband of the deceased and axe has not been recovered from the common place accessible to all rather from perusal of the seizure list, which is appended at page no.25 of the brief, it appears that blood stain axe has been recovered from behind the house of the petitioner in bushes, as such, he may not be enlarged on bail.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the materials available on record and looking into the gravity of the offence and recovery of blood stain Axe on disclosure of the petitioner, who is husband of the deceased, as such, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the bail application is hereby rejected.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
R.S.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail is maintainable and to be granted in a case involving Section 302/201 IPC offences.
Whether the recovery of the murder weapon from behind the petitioner's house impacts the bail decision.
Sk. Faquruddin @ Rajesh
The State of Jharkhand
Kailash Prasad Deo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
