Allowed

Masih Bodra v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC2 Aug 2022B.A./5762/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ranchi granted bail to the petitioner, an accused in a murder and witchcraft case. Relying on the lack of concrete evidence beyond confessions and the petitioner's undertaking to appear for trial, the court ordered release on furnishing a bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of like amount each.

Masih Bodra Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 5762 of 2022

¶3

Masih Bodra …… Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand ……Opposite party

¶6

----------

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶8

-----

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Nawin Kr. Singh, A.P.P.

¶10

Order No.03/ Dated:02.08.2022

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with S.T. No. 29 of 2022 arising out of Tapkara P.S. Case No. 17 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. No. 670 of 2021, registered for the offence under Section 364/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Prevention of Witch Craft (Daain) Practices Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Khunti.

¶13

As per F.I.R. allegation is that on 18.07.2021 a missing report of informant’s sister, namely, Somari Bodra was registered and in the course of enquiry I.O. came to know on 13.09.2021 that present petitioner and others have killed Somari Bodra on assumption that she is daain and due to her black magic her nephew’s elder brother Soma Bodra always fell ill, hence they have killed Somari Bodra and thrown her dead body in the river.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case due to village politics. It is submitted that none of

¶15

the witnesses interrogated during investigation have first hand knowledge of the occurrence rather they have stated about the extra judicial confession of the petitioner before them. True fact is that petitioner has never confessed his guilt either before any witness or before police. The petitioner is languishing in Judicial custody since 14.09.2021 but trial has not yet commenced. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate in trial by remaining physically present on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial and shall not indulge in any manner in tampering with the prosecution evidences or maneuvering with the prosecution witnesses, hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶16

Learned A.P.P appearing on behalf of State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted that there are sufficient positive materials against the petitioner showing active involvement of the petitioner in commission of the murder of the deceased due to suspicion of daain. Dead body has also not been recovered, hence he does not deserve bail.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of the fact that except extra judicial confession before some villagers and confessional statement recorded by police, no evidence has been collected against the petitioner and nothing has been recovered in pursuance of confessional statement, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Khunti in connection with S.T. No. 29 of 2022 arising out of Tapkara P.S. Case No. 17 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. No. 670 of 2021. Petitioner is directed to appear on each and every date till conclusion of the trial unless prevented from sufficient reasons to the satisfaction of learned trial court.

¶18

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

Masih Bodra v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Masih Bodra 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

Nitu Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pradeep Kumar Alias Pradeep Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nurain Alam Alias Munna Vs State of Jharkhand

Dinesh Raut Vs the State of Jharkhand

Munna Paswan Alias Munna Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Charan Purti Alias Caran Pahan Alias Kali Vs the State of Jharkhand