Dismissed

Rahul Kumar Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC17 Mar 2023B.A./1093/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application, the High Court of Jharkhand rejected the plea of the petitioner who was in custody for murder charges but whose charge sheet was filed under different sections. The court held that considering the seriousness of the alleged offence and the progress of the trial, bail could not be granted.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; bail not granted. State directed to ensure prompt production of witnesses and expeditious trial.

Rahul Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 1093 of 2023

¶3

¶4

Rahul Kumar Singh .... ...... Petitioner Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand ... ..... Opposite Party

¶6

¶7

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶8

--For the Petitioner : Md. Zaid Ahmed, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Rajendra Ram Ravi Das, A.P.P.

¶9

¶10

02/ 17.03.2023 Learned counsel for the parties are present.

¶11

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with S.T. Case No.96 of 2019 arising out of Bariatu P.S. Case No. 199 of 2018, dated 13.07.2018, corresponding to G.R. Case No.4011 of 2018, registered under Sections 302 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code, although charges have been framed for the offence under Section 396 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code, by an order dated 09.04.2019, now pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner III, Ranchi.

¶12

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 16.08.2019 in B.A. No.5008 of 2019 and thereafter, the petitioner again moved this Court in B.A. No.7239 of 2021 wherein, the bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as not pressed. He has submitted that the case was registered under Section 302/34 of Indian Penal Code, but the charge sheet was submitted under Section 396/412 of Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel has further submitted that out of 13 witnesses, only 6 have been examined.

¶13

4. Considering the nature of allegation involved in the present case and the seriousness of offence and also the fact that the bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on merit and the trial is in progress, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶14

5. Accordingly, this bail application is hereby dismissed.

¶15

6. However, the learned counsel for the State is directed to instruct the concerned authority to ensure prompt production of witnesses before the learned court below. The learned court below is also directed to take steps for expeditious trial.

¶16

7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court below through “E-mail/FAX”.

¶17

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶18

Saurav/-

Rahul Kumar Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Kumar Singh 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

Lodo Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nileshwar Kumar Goud Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ms Jyoti Diamond and Gems Garden Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

State of Bihar Jharkhand Thr Vs M/S Jai Guru Construction AndORS

State of Bihar Now Jharkhand Vs M/S.G.S.Atwal And Co.Engnpvt.L

Dr Debi Prasad Mukhopadhyay Vs the Registrar Sidhu Kanhu Murmu University