Bharat Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2024)

Bharat Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted: petitioner directed to be released on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamshedpur in connection with Sitaramdera P.S Case No. 177 of 2023, subject to conditions of attendance at trial, abstention from similar offences, and non-tampering with evidence/witnesses.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, an accused under Sections 302 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Sitaramdera P.S Case No. 177 of 2023, should be released on regular bail.

Court's answer

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation against the petitioner and the materials available against him, the court was inclined to release the petitioner on regular bail.

Ratio / Principle

Bail was granted on the condition that the petitioner remain physically present on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial unless prevented by sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

Key takeaways

Bail was granted on the further condition that the petitioner shall not indulge in any other or similar offence till the conclusion of the trial.ratio¶15
Bail was granted on the further condition that the petitioner shall not tamper with prosecution evidences or influence prosecution witnesses.ratio¶16
In case of violation of the aforesaid conditions, the petitioner's bail shall stand cancelled and he shall be taken into custody by the learned Trial Court itself.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail Application (B.A. No.2568 of 2024), High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, Order No.06 dated 18.06.2024 (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.): Regular bail granted to Bharat Yadav, accused under Sections 302 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Sitaramdera P.S Case No. 177 of 2023, pending before the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamshedpur. The FIR alleges that the petitioner abused his wife Lalti Devi for childlessness, married Ranju Devi as second wife, and that the deceased's body was found at MGM Hospital after the petitioner reported her death on 09.10.2023; the petitioner was in judicial custody since 13.10.2023 and claimed no criminal antecedents. Release ordered on a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions: physical presence on every date of trial, abstention from similar offences, and no tampering with prosecution evidences or influencing of witnesses; violation entails cancellation of bail and custody by the Trial Court.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No.2568 of 2024

Bharat Yadav … Petitioner

Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranish Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, Addl. P.P.

Order No.06/Dated- 18.06.2024

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Sitaramdera P.S Case No. 177 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 302 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Jamshedpur.

As per FIR, it is alleged that informant reported that his sister, Lalti Devi, was abused by her husband (the petitioner) for being childless and faced further abuse when the petitioner solemnized second marriage with one Ranju Devi, whereafter all three of them started living together. Despite her frequent complaints of torture, the informant was prevented from taking her away. On 09.10.2023, the petitioner informed him of her death, leading to the discovery of her body at MGM Hospital.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all as alleged in the FIR. Hence, petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is languishing in Judicial Custody since 13.10.2023 without any rhymes and reasons. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Petitioner undertakes to cooperate 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 petitioner may be extended the privilege of bail.

On the other hand, learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Hence, petitioner does not deserve bail.

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation against the petitioner coupled with the materials available against the petitioner. I am inclined to release the petitioner on regular bail. Accordingly, the petitioner named above is directed to be released on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Jamshedpur in connection with Sitaramdera P.S Case No. 177 of 2023 subject to the conditions:-

(1) Petitioner shall remain 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.

(2) Petitioner shall not indulge in any or other similar offence till the conclusion of the trial.

(3) Petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidences or influencing the prosecution witnesses. In case of violation of the aforesaid conditions, the bail of the

petitioner shall be cancelled and shall be taken into custody by the learned Trial Court itself.

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

Sachin