Dismissed¶14

MD Abdul Alias Abdul Mian v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC23 Aug 2024B.A./5453/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court bail rejection; murder charge Sections 302 and 34 IPC; Borio (Mirzachowki) P.S. Case No. 77 of 2003; G.R. Case No.199 of 2003; S.T. Case No. 65A of 2012, Sahebganj; judicial custody since 12.04.2024; gravity of offence; 3 of 11 witnesses examined; direction to conclude trial within six months; liberty to renew bail prayer; co-accused Jani Mian.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to renew the prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded within six months. ¶14

MD Abdul Alias Abdul Mian Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No.5453 of 2024

¶3

Md. Abdul @ Abdul Mian, aged about 59 years, Son of Md. Jumman, Resident of Choti Kodarjenna, P.O. & P.S.—Sahibganj (M), District--Sahibganj.

¶4

… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶5

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikas Kumar, Adv. : Ms. Apurva Shrestha, Adv. : Mr. Niraj Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Mahato, A.P.P.

¶7

Order No.08/Dated- 23.08.2024

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

The petitioner has been an made accused in connection Borio (Mirzachowki) P.S. Case No. 77 of 2003 corresponding to G.R. Case No.199 of 2003 (S.T. Case No. 65A of 2012) registered for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 34 of the I.P.C., which is pending in the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Sahebganj.

¶10

As per F.I.R., the husband of the informant had been beaten to death by accused persons namely Jani Mian, Abdul Mian (petitioner) and two other unknown persons.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case only on the basis of suspicion. It is next submitted that there is no direct or indirect evidence against the petitioner in the alleged offence and nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the present petitioner. Petitioner is in judicial custody since 12.04.2024. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and to remain physically present on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial and shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution

¶12

evidence or influence the witnesses or gain over them. Hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Learned Addl. P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted that according to the present status report out of 11 witnesses, 3 witnesses have been examined. Hence, petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Considering the gravity of offence which is committed by the petitioner, I am not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail at present, which stands rejected.

¶15

The learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the case and conclude within six months otherwise petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

¶16

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶17

Amar/-

MD Abdul Alias Abdul Mian v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Abdul Alias Abdul Mian v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sahil Gagrai Alias Ajay Gagrai Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sukhram Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dilip Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anju Devi Alias Manju Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mahesh Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manish Kumar Mishra Vs the State of Jharkhand