This single-judge oral order considers an application for bail by the petitioner accused of matricide under Section 302 IPC. Rejecting the prayer, the court notes the nature of the offence and direct allegations against the petitioner, refusing release despite his wife's bail.
Prayer for bail is hereby rejected.
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. 2874 of 2023
Preetam Kumar @ Pritam … …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … …. Opp. Party -----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ----For the Petitioner : Mr. R.C.P. Sah, Advocate For the State : Ms. Sushma Aind, A.P.P.
Oral Order
04 / Dated : 13.06.2023
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner named above has been made accused in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No. 14 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 302, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of C.J.M., Seraikella.
As per the prosecution case, it is a case of matricide and the petitioner being son is the principal accused. The petitioner is named in the FIR and there is direct and specific allegation against him that he along with his wife committed murder of his mother.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner’s wife has been enlarged on bail. The death was natural and not homicidal in nature.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as per the postmortem report, the deceased had sustained antemortem injury by hard and blunt substance resulting in cardiac arrest. The deceased before her death had disclosed to her neighbour that it was the petitioner who was committed offence of murder. The wife of the petitioner was granted bail on the ground that the petitioner had nine year old son and there was no one to look after him as both, the husband and the wife, were in custody.
Considering the nature of offence and direct allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is hereby rejected.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J . )
AKT/Satendra
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to enlarge the petitioner, accused in a murder case under Section 302 IPC, on bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Preetam Kumar @ Pritam
The State of Jharkhand
Gautam Kumar Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
