Vinod Kharia Vs the State of Jharkhand

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence, and only on the basis of suspicion, that there used to be quarrel between the parties regarding witchcraft, the petitioner has been suspected in this case. The counsel further submits that so far confession leading to recovery of tangi is concerned, the said blood-stained tangi has not been recovered, and therefore recovery of using weapon in the alleged offence has not been corroborated with the confessional statement of the petitioner. The counsel further submits that there is no signature of the petitioner on the seizure list and the place of recovery is not specific as given in the confession, and only the name of the village is indicated. The counsel further submits that the confession of the petitioner has taken place at 3 pm while the arrest has been shown at 17:10(5pm), and therefore, this also raises suspicion regarding arrest of the petitioner. The counsel further submits that as far the blood stained FSL report is concerned it has not co-related the blood of any of the parties and therefore, benefit of doubt may be given. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 15.09.2023, and therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and pointed out as per the allegations and as per the medical injury report there is sharp cutting injury inflicted by sharp cutting weapon. The counsel further submits that blood-stained tangi was recovered which is a sharp cutting weapon. The counsel further submits that as per the evidences indicated in para 8 and 9 of the case diary, it is evident that there were arguments and

¶13

quarrel between the parties over witchcraft. The counsel further submitted that blood which was found on the tangi was proved to be human blood.

¶14

Having heard learned counsels for the parties and in the facts and circumstances on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner in connection with Sisai P.S. Case No. 93/2023 corresponding to G.R. No. 704/2023.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioner stands rejected.

¶16

(Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)

¶17

Abha/-

Vinod Kharia v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kharia v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan Kumar Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Gurudeo Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sk Faiz Alias Sf Faiz Alias Shekh Faiz Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sandeep Baghwar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ambar Kumar Ram Alias Amber Kumar Alias Taman Vs the State of Jharkhand

Maisa Pahariya Vs the State of Jharkhand