High Court at Ranchi rejected bail application filed by accused persons facing trial for murder. Court held bail rejected based on prosecution evidence including confession and recovery of weapons.
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.4451 of 2022
The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
-----For the Petitioners : Mr. S.K. Vishwakarma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, A.P.P. --------
06/18.07.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.P.P. for the
State.
This bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicants with prayer to release on bail in connection with S.T. Case No.33 of 2022 arising out of Saiko P.S. Case No.15 of 2021 registered under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Prevention of Witch (DAAIN) Practices Act pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions JudgeI, Khunti.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the F.I.R. of this case was lodged against four named accused including the applicants with the allegations that on 18.11.2021, the informant went to the house of her sister, where his sister and brother-in-law both were found missing. The informant asked her relative in regard to whereabouts of her sister and brother-in-law and it was told that all the named accused had killed his sister and brother-in-law and their dead bodies were concealed. Accordingly, the F.I.R. was lodged.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the all the four named accused have been named in the F.I.R. on the basis of suspicion and there is no direct evidence against the applicants in regard to committing the murder of sister and brother-in-law of the informant. The applicants have been languishing in jail since 20.11.2021.
Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicants and contended that the prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. The motive behind the occurrence is that the sister and brother-in-law of the informant were practicing witch craft and on account of property dispute, all the accused persons, who also belong to same family wanted to eliminate them. Moreover, all the four named accused confessed their guilt and on their confessional statement and pointing out the dead body of the deceased and the weapon used in committing their murder were recovered. As per postmortem report, there were five ante mortem injuries on the dead body of deceased—
-2-
Sanika Nag and four ante mortem injuries were on the dead body of deceased— Patti Devi. It is further submitted that the cause of death of the deceased was shock and hemorrhage as a result of ante mortem injuries.
In view of the submissions made and materials on record, the bail application of the applicants is hereby rejected.
(Subhash Chand, J.)
Rohit
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to accused persons facing trial for murder under Sections 302 and 201 IPC.
Idi Nag @ Indri Nag
Bhagta Nag @ Bhogta Nag
The State of Jharkhand
SUBHASH CHAND
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
