Kanhai Lal Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2024)

Kanhai Lal Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted to both petitioners upon furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to cooperation in the pending criminal proceeding and presence on every date of the criminal trial, failing which the court below may cancel bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioners, accused under Section 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Chandankiyari (Barmasia OP) P.S. Case No. 214 of 2023. +1 more

Court's answer

Both petitioners are directed to be released on regular bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class-cum-Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Bokaro, in connection with Chandankiyari (Barmasia OP) P.S. Case No. 214 of 2023.

Ratio / Principle

The inclination to grant bail rested principally on the statements of independent witnesses examined during investigation at paras 32 and 41 of the case diary, who had not supported the prosecution's case.

Key takeaways

Bail is granted subject to conditions: the petitioners must cooperate in the criminal proceeding pending before the court below and remain present on every and each date of the criminal trial, failing which appropriate order shall be passed by the learned court below for cancellation of bail.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Navneet Kumar, J.), B.A. No. 371 of 2024, dated 12.04.2024: regular bail allowed to Kanhai Lal Pandey @ Kanaie Lal Pandey and Vikash Pandey @ Bikash Pandey, father-in-law and brother-in-law of a deceased woman said to have committed suicide, accused under Section 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code in Chandankiyari (Barmasia OP) P.S. Case No. 214 of 2023 pending before the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class-cum-Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Bokaro. Deciding factor: independent witnesses Kishori Mohan Pandey and Akhilesh Pandey (case-diary paras 32 and 41) categorically denied dowry-linked torture and cruelty, outweighing the supportive statements of the deceased's relatives Birbal Pandey, Usha Pandey and Haren Chandra Pandey (paras 18, 19 and 21). Bail bond of Rs.25,000/- each with two sureties of like amount; conditional on cooperation and attendance on every trial date, failing which the court below may pass appropriate order for cancellation of bail.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 371 of 2024

1.Kanhai Lal Pandey @ Kanaie Lal Pandey

2.Vikash Pandey @ Bikash Pandey --- --- Petitioners

Versus

The State of Jharkhand --- --- Opposite Party

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

For the Petitioners : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, A.P.P.

03/12.04.2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P.

This is an application for regular bail in which petitioners are accused in connection with Chandankiyari (Barmasia OP) P.S. Case No. 214 of 2023 for the offence registered under Section 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class –cum-Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Bokaro.

The gist of the allegations as set out in the F.I.R. is that these petitioners i.e., Kanhai Lal Pandey @ Kanaie Lal Pandey and Vikash Pandey @ Bikash Pandey being father-in-law and brother-in-law of the deceased along with other members of the family had been causing torture and cruelty upon the deceased for want of non-fulfillment of dowry, who is said to have committed suicide. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire allegations are false and fabricated as is evident from the statement of the witnesses recorded during course of investigation. Several independent witnesses have been examined namely Kishori Mohan Pandey and Akhilesh Pandey, who at para 32 and 41 of the case diary have not supported the case of the prosecution and categorically stated that family members of the husband were not causing any kind of torture and cruelty upon the deceased for want of non-fulfillment of dowry.

On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. has opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners and stated that the three witnesses who are the family members of the deceased including the informant-father Birbal Pandey, mother-Usha Pandey and grandfather-Haren Chandra Pandey at para 18,19 and 21 respectively of the case diary have supported the case of the prosecution but the learned A.P.P. did not controvert the fact that witnesses examined at para 32 and 41 of the case

-2-

diary are independent witness and they have not supported the case of the prosecution.

Having heard the parties, perused the record of the case including the case diary.

Having taken into consideration the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsels for the parties and materials in record, particularly the statement of independent witnesses examined during course of investigation mentioned at para 32 and 41 of the case diary, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

Accordingly, the petitioners, named above, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class-cumAdditional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Bokaro in connection with Chandankiyari (Barmasia OP) P.S. Case No. 214 of 2023, subject to the condition that petitioners will cooperate in the criminal proceeding pending in the court below and they will remain present on every and each date of the criminal trial, failing which, appropriate order shall be passed by the learned court below for cancellation of bail.

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

A.Mohanty