Allowed

Sukhdeo Rajwar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 Jul 2022B.A./1590/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants regular bail to the petitioner, an accused in a Section 304B POD case. The court observed that the cause of death was unascertained and no injury was found, deeming the case ingredients for Section 304B not fully attracted.

What did the court decide?

The applicant directed to be released on bail with Rs. 10,000 bond and two sureties on condition of submitting Aadhaar and mobile details.

Sukhdeo Rajwar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

- 1 -

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No.1590 of 2022

¶3

Sukhdeo Rajwar …… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶5

--------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Kumar Nilesh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, A.P.P For the Informant : Mr. M. B. Lal, Advocate ---------

¶6

05/Dated: 14th July, 2022

¶7

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P.

¶8

2. The applicant-husband, who is in custody since 02.08.2021, has approached this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with Baliapur P.S. Case No.155 of 2021, registered for the offence under Sections 304B / 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶9

3. It appears that the applicant-husband has been made an accused for committing offence under Section 304B of I.P.C as the death has occurred within one year of marriage.

¶10

4. Learned counsel for the applicant claims innocence of the applicant and it has been submitted that the death is natural and as such the ingredient of Section 304B of I.P.C does not get attracted. It has further been submitted that the investigation is complete and the applicant undertakes to participate in the trial.

¶11

5. On the other hand learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant. 6. On perusal of record, it appears that the cause of death has not been ascertained either in the post-mortem report or in the viscera report. No injury on the person of the deceased has been found.

¶12

Considering the above facts, I am inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the applicant is directed to be released on bail, on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J. M., Dhanbad, in connection with Baliapur P.S. Case No.155 of 2021, on the condition that the applicant will submit self-attested photocopy of his Aadhaar Card and also submit his mobile number before the learned court below which he will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of the court.

¶13

7. In view of the disposal of bail application, I.A. No.5623 of 2022 also stands disposed of.

¶14

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶15

Chandan/-

Sukhdeo Rajwar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukhdeo Rajwar 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

Ludru Alias Jalaluddin Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anand Kumar Mehta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Imroz Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mohit Yadav Alias Mohit Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sandeep Bhagat Alias Sandeep Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mota Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand