Petitioner sought regular bail in a serious criminal case where trial has remained pending since 2013. Despite prior rejections, petition argued delay due to pandemic, but Court declined to reconsider.
Prayer for regular bail of the petitioner rejected. No direction regarding the pendency of the trial issued.
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. 13590 of 2021
Chutariya Kharwar @ Talash Kharwar … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
For the Petitioner : Mr. Aashish Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, A.P.P.
-----
03/14.01.2022 The present bail application is taken up today through Video conferencing.
At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner,
the defect as pointed out by the office is ignored.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is an accused for the offences punishable under Sections 147/148/149/323/341/342/324/307/376/302/120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, in connection with S.T. No. 105 of 2015, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IX, Palamau.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the bail applications of the petitioner were earlier rejected by this Court five times, yet by way of present bail application, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for regular bail primarily for the reason that he is in judicial custody since 21.09.2013 and the trial has not yet concluded. This Court while rejecting the last bail application preferred by the petitioner vide order dated 16.10.2020 had directed the learned trial court to take up the trial of this case on priority basis once the situation prevailing due to outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic normalizes and to conclude the same as expeditiously as possible. However, since there has been no further progress in the trial, the petitioner may be given the privilege of regular bail.
Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned A.P.P. while opposing the petitioner’s prayer for bail submits that all the witnesses so far examined in the trial have supported the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that though for few months, the situation prevailing due to outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic had normalized, yet now the
functioning of the court has again been affected due to third wave of said pandemic which may be the reason for no effective progress in the trial. This Court vide order dated 16.10.2020 has already directed the trial court to take up the trial of the present case on priority basis, hence, no further direction is required on that issue.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to reconsider the petitioner’s application for grant of regular bail. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Manish
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, an accused in custody since 2013 facing serious charges with no trial progress, is entitled to regular bail.
Whether the pendency of trial due to non-normalization of the COVID-19 situation warrants reconsideration of bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Chutariya Kharwar @ Talash Kharwar
The State of Jharkhand
RAJESH SHANKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
