Allowed

Naram Singh Bahanda v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC12 Jan 2022B.A./10450/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This short order allows a bail application filed by the accused Naram Singh Bahanda in a murder case (Sections 302/34 IPC) pending at the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Chaibasa, on the basis of circumstantial evidence.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs.30,000/ with two sureties of the like amount to the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Chaibasa.

Naram Singh Bahanda Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 10450 of 2021

¶3

Naram Singh Bahanda ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

¶4

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajnani Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Naveen Kr. Gaunjhu, A.P.P.

¶5

-------(Through Video Conferencing)

¶6

06/12.01.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the

¶7

State.

¶8

This bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant– Naram Singh Bahanda with prayer to release on bail in connection with Tonto P.S. Case No. 18 of 2020 registered under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Chaibasa.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the F.I.R. of this case was lodged by the informant in regard to murder of her aunt (fufu) Padma Purty by the accused persons, namely, Lebeya Purty, Budhan Singh Purty, Naram Singh Bahanda and Jonko Purty with the motive to usurp the land of aunt of the informant. It is further submitted that the prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence and there is no evidence against the applicant except the confessional statement of the applicant and other co-accused persons. On the basis of confessional statement, knife used in murder is alleged to be recovered. It is also submitted that there is nothing on record to establish that the knife recovered was used in murder except the confessional statement. There is no link to indicate that the murder of deceased was committed by the applicant. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 31.07.2020.

¶10

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that the applicant and other co-accused persons have confessed their guilt and pointing out that the knife was recovered from the place just behind the house of the deceased.

¶11

In view of the submissions made and materials on record, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Chaibasa in aforesaid case.

¶12

(Subhash Chand, J.)

¶13

Amar/Madhav/-

Naram Singh Bahanda v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naram Singh Bahanda 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sukhram Munda Alias Tupun Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shankar Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Onkar Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pappu Kumar Alias Pappu Raj Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kishor Nag Vs the State of Jharkhand