Allowed

Chhutu Mahato Alias Chhutu Lal Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Aug 2022B.A./4785/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand enlarged the petitioners on bail in a murder case. Despite the nature of the offences (murder), the court found insufficient evidence beyond the last seen theory and a contested confessional statement, directing release upon furnishing a bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

The petitioners are directed to be released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000 each with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge.

Chhutu Mahato Alias Chhutu Lal Mahato Vs the… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 4785 of 2022

¶3

Chhutu Mahato @ Chhutu Lal Mahato

¶4

Sushen Mahato

¶5

…… Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand ……Opposite party

¶8

----------

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶10

-----

¶11

For the Petitioners : Mr. Abhishek Kumar Dubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, A.P.P.

¶12

Order No.04/ Dated:11.08.2022

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

The petitioners have been made accused in connection with S.T. No. 54 of 2022 arising out of Nimdih P.S. Case No. 60 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. No. 62 of 2022, registered for the offence under Section 302/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella.

¶15

As per F.I.R. allegation is that on 18.09.2021 at about 7.30 A.M. informant came to know from the villagers that his mother namely Sukurmani Majhi is lying dead in the field of Bhadri Manjhi. The informant along with his brother went at the place of occurrence and saw his mother was lying there under substantive injuries on ear and nose. The injured was taken to M.G.M. Hospital, Jamshedpur. Thereafter to RIMS Ranchi but died in the course of treatment. It is alleged that at the night of occurrence at about 11:30 P.M. present petitioners consumed liquour along with the deceased and she was singing with them. The informant suspected that present petitioners might have killed his mother.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence at all rather they have been falsely

¶17

implicated in this case after due deliberation. There is no iota of evidence against the petitioners except the confessional statement forcibly recorded by the police. The petitioners are languishing in Judicial custody since 26.11.2021 and 06.12.2021 respectively without rhymes and reasons. Petitioners undertake to co-operate in the trial of the case by remaining physically present as and when required and shall not indulge in any manner in tampering with the prosecution evidences or influencing the witnesses of prosecution, hence, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

¶18

Learned A.P.P appearing on behalf of State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submitted that they have been lastly seen with the deceased in the night of the occurrence and they have also confessed their guilt, hence they do not deserve bail.

¶19

It appears that except last seen theory and self-confessional statement of the petitioners there are no materials on record.

¶20

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation against the petitioners coupled with materials available against petitioners, I am inclined to release the petitioners, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, named above, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella in connection with S.T. No. 54 of 2022 arising out of Nimdih P.S. Case No. 60 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. No. 62 of 2022 subject to the condition that petitioners shall cooperate in the trial of the case by remaining physically present on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial of this case unless prevented from sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

¶21

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶22

R.K.

Chhutu Mahato Alias Chhutu Lal Mahato v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhutu Mahato Alias Chhutu Lal Mahato 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

Kaushal Jaiswal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mansoor Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sangam Lohra Vs State of Jharkhand

Ram Pravesh Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Hanif Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dhurv Singh Alias Chotu Vs the State of Jharkhand