Allowed

Santosh Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC2 Feb 2021B.A./97/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ranchi granted bail to the petitioner, Santosh Mahto, accused in a murder case, on his undertaking to correct stamp defects and cooperate with the trial, subject to a bond of Rs. 25,000.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of the like amount each; defects pointed out by Stamp Reporter ignored due to undertaking.

Santosh Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 97 of 2021

¶2

Santosh Mahto … Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶5

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. Birendra Kumar , Adv. For the State : Mr. B.N. Ojha , Addl. P.P.

¶7

02 / 02.02.2021 Heard the parties through Video Conferencing.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

¶9

In view of the personal undertaking given by learned counsel for the petitioner the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter are ignored for the present.

¶10

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Tamar P.S. case no. 20 of 2020 registered under Sections 302, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶11

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has murdered the husband of the informant. It is then submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been implicated in this case on the basis of his own confessional statement and suspicion. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and there is no eye witness to the occurrence. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 20.06.2020 as mentioned in paragraph 7 of the bail application and the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be released on bail.

¶12

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶13

Considering the facts of the case, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M., 1^st class, Ranchi in connection with Tamar P.S. case no. 20 of 2020 subject to the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case.

¶14

( ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

¶15

Smita/-

Santosh Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

MD Ejaz Ahmad Alias MD Ejaz Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Punit Ishwar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sunita Verma Alias Sunita Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ranjeet Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pankaj Das Alias Pankaj Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Azad Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand