Anticipatory bail application rejected. Court held no case for bail is made out despite applicant's claim of false implication, given the specific role of assault and resulting death in the incident.
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 A.B.A. No. 3563 of 2022
Saidun Bibi @ Sahidun Bibi ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND -------For the Petitioner : Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate For the State : Mr. Md. Hatim, A.P.P. --------
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
06/ 02.08.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Bagdehri P.S. Case No. 02 of 2022, registered under Sections 323, 341, 307/34 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamtara.
Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the F.I.R. of this case was lodged against five named accused including the applicant with these allegations that all the named accused had restrained the brother of the informant from tying the bullock and buffaloes on the land and on the same issue, all the accused persons had assaulted to the brother of the informant. One Abu Bakr Khan had assaulted with ‘Sabal’ to the brother of the informant and the informant came to rescue him at the same time Saidun Bibi @ Sahidun Bibi had assaulted on his leg with hammer. Brother of the informant was admitted to the Hospital and subsequently died.
Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that as per F.I.R. allegations, brother of the informant who had sustained grievous injury and succumbed to injuries was inflicted injuries by the accused Abu Bakr Khan. The only role assigned to the applicant is of assaulting with hammer to the informant and there is no injury report of the same. It is also further submitted that one F.I.R. was also lodged of the same incident on behalf of the applicant side against the persons of the informant side which was registered on case crime No. 03 of 2022 and in this incident persons of both the sides sustained injury. The applicant has been implicated in this case and is having no criminal antecedent.
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 in the F.I.R. itself the specific role assaulting with hammer has been assigned to the present applicant. The false implication of the applicant cannot be accepted, more so cross case is also filed on behalf of the applicant side against the informant side.
In view of the submissions made and the materials on record, no case of anticipatory bail is made out. Accordingly, the same is hereby rejected.
(Subhash Chand, J.)
P.K.S.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a case of anticipatory bail is made out for the applicant implicated in a grievous injury case causing death.
Whether the specific role assigned to the applicant of assaulting with a hammer justifies anticipatory bail.
Whether the presence of a cross-case filed by the applicant side warrants granting anticipatory bail.
Saidun Bibi @ Sahidun Bibi
SUBHASH CHAND
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
