Dismissed

Pakila Tudu Alias Bale Tudu Alias Bala Biti Tudu Alias Pakela Alias Bale Alias Bale Biti Tudu v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC20 Apr 2023B.A./339/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment rejects a bail application filed by two applicants accused of murder and witchcraft offences. The court declined to grant regular bail despite the applicants' claims of innocence and cnued participation assertions.

What did the court decide?

Bail prayer rejected; applicants remain in custody.

What the court decided

Pakila Tudu Alias Bale Tudu Alias Bala Biti… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No.339 of 2023

¶3

Pakila Tudu @ Bale Tudu @ Bala Biti Tudu @ Pakela @ Bale @ Bale Biti Tudu 2. Lakhan Tudu … …Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand … …Opp. Party(s) --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR --For the Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) : Mr. Raja Ravi Shekhar Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. V. Roy, A.P.P. ---

¶4

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶5

04/20.04.2023: Heard the parties.

¶6

The applicant Nos.1 and 2 are in custody since 17.07.2022 and 31.08.2022 respectively have approached this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with S.T. No.344 of 2022 arising out of Radhanagar P.S. Case No.165 of 2020 registered for the offence under Sections 302/34 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Witch Craft (Daain) Practices Act, pending in the court of Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Rajmahal.

¶7

The applicants are accused of committing murder by beheading.

¶8

It has been submitted by the counsel for the applicant(s) that complete set of FIR along with its enclosure have been annexed with this bail application and there is no suppression on his/her part.

¶9

Innocence has been claimed and participation in the trial has been assured. It has been submitted that the allegation of beheading is totally false against applicant No.1. Further, applicant No.2 was merely standing outside. Similarly situated one of the co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. On the above facts, prayer for bail has been made.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted that the informant is the eye witness to the incident and he has stated that these applicants have participated in the commission of crime.

¶11

Considering the above facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant (s) on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the applicant(s) stands rejected.

¶12

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶13

Ravi/-

Pakila Tudu Alias Bale Tudu Alias Bala Biti Tudu Alias Pakela Alias Bale Alias Bale Biti Tudu v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Pakila Tudu Alias Bale Tudu Alias Bala Biti Tudu Alias Pakela Alias Bale Alias Bale Biti Tudu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Shankar Mahto Alias Veer Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Basudev Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jagdev Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Mafazzal Hussain Vs the State of Jharkhand

Safikul Seikh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mahesh Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand