Allowed

Punit Kumar Yadav Alias Punit Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC12 Apr 2024B.A./548/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application by an accused in a murder and disappearance of evidence case arising from a young man's death by hanging after alleged pressure over a marriage proposal. Bail granted on parity with similarly situated co-accused who had already been released.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties of like amount each, subject to conditions of trial attendance and cooperation.

Punit Kumar Yadav Alias Punit Yadav Vs the… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 548 of 2024

¶2

Punit Kumar Yadav @ Punit Yadav --- --- Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

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

¶5

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ayush Deb, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Mishra, A.P.P.

¶7

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

¶8

This is an application for regular bail filed by the petitioner, who is an accused in connection with Hunterganj P.S. Case No.110 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1795 of 2022 registered under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Chatra.

¶9

The gist of the allegations as set out in the F.I.R. lodged by the father of the deceased is that about six months ago the petitioner along with other co-accused had proposed the informant- father of the deceased to solemnize the marriage of his younger son Ashok Yadavdeceased with Aarti Kumari, daughter of Kuli Yadav, which was refused by the Informant. It is further alleged that on 29.08.2021, the son of the informant had left the house at 12 O’ Clock of day time but till evening he had not returned. On the same day in night at 8 O’ Clock, petitioner, Dhananjay Yadav and Rahul Yadav talked with the informant on mobile phone in presence of his son in Banka school. His son compelled them to let him talk with Aarti Kumari, otherwise he would commit suicide. On 30.08.2021 the informant and Laxman Yadav went to the house of Kuli Yadav and asked about his son but accused persons had shown their ignorance. On returning, they saw the dead body of his son which was hanging with the tree.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that the F.I.R. of this case was lodged against 11 named accused persons out of whom similarly situated co-accused Vijay Yadav @ Bijay Kumar Yadav, Mano Devi @ Manwa Devi, Rahul Yadav @ Rahul Kumar, Ajay Yadav @ Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Kumar Yadav and Dhananjay Yadav @ Dhananjay Kumar have been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this

¶11

-2-

¶12

Court in B.A. No. 16498 of 2021 dated 30.03.2022, B.A. No. 6746 of 2022 dated 17.08.2022, B.A. No. 9839 of 2022 dated 22.11.2022, B.A. No. 11605 of 2022 dated 23.12.2022 and B.A. No. 12607 of 2022 dated 23.01.2023 respectively. It is further stated at para 13 of the bail application that petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Therefore, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. has strongly opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner but he did not controvert the fact that similarly situated co-accused have been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court.

¶14

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

¶15

Having taken into consideration the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsels for the parties and materials in record, particularly the fact that similarly situated co-accused have been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶16

Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Chatra in connection with Huntergang P.S. Case No. 110 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1795 of 2022 , subject to the condition that petitioner will cooperate in the criminal proceeding pending in the court below and he 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.

¶17

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

¶18

A.Mohanty

Punit Kumar Yadav Alias Punit Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punit Kumar Yadav Alias Punit Yadav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jai Kumar Alias Jeet Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pandeya Tuti Alias Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Gulam Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kanhai Lal Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sitaram Kumar Mallah Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajiv Samad Alias Rajeev Samad Vs the State of Jharkhand