Allowed

Suchit Das Alias Bachu Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Sept 2024B.A./6235/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application by an accused in a Jasidih Rail PS murder and related offences case. Counsel argued the petitioner had no direct role, was in custody since April 2024 with charge-sheet filed, and an identically placed co-accused had been granted bail. The State opposed. The court granted bail on furnishing bonds of Rs.25,000 each with two like sureties.

What the court decided

AI extract

Suchit Das Alias Bachu Das Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6235 of 2024

¶2

Suchit Das @ Bachu Das ... … Petitioner

¶3

Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party

¶4

¶5

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

¶6

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Manish Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Mahesh Tiwary, Advocate

¶7

¶8

Order No. 03 / Dated 4^th September, 2024

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant.

¶10

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Jasidih Rail P.S. Case No. 23 of 2023, dated 30.03.2023, for the offence registered under Sections 302/ 201/ 120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the case is pending before the Court of learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Madhupur.

¶11

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that as per the prosecution story it is alleged that this petitioner alongwith the co-accused persons have killed the nephew of the informant.

¶12

Learned counsel has further submitted that the entire allegations are false and fabricated as nothing has come into the evidence during the course of investigation that this petitioner is involved in the commission of the offence although it has come into the evidence that the daughter of this petitioner was having chat with the deceased and both were in love affairs before the marriage of the daughter of the petitioner as the said daughter is already married with another boy.

¶13

It has also been pointed out that the similarly situated co-accused person i.e. Navin Kumar Das @ Navin Kumar has been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No. 6073 of 2024 vide order dated 12.08.2024.

¶14

Learned counsel has further pointed out that vide para-57 of the case diary the daughter of this petitioner has categorically stated that she did not have had any talk or any kind of chat with the deceased and in this view of the

¶15

matter it is submitted that this petitioner being the father of the girl who is said to have been in love affairs with the deceased has no role to play in the commission of the offence and the daughter of the petitioner is already married.

¶16

Further, this petitioner is said to be in jail since 30.04.2024 and charge-sheet in this case has been submitted and therefore, the possibility of tampering the evidence is very remote. It has also been stated that this petitioner has no criminal history

¶17

On the other hand the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State assisted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant have vehemently opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that the daughter of this petitioner had been in love affairs with the deceased and that is why in order to take revenge the deceased has been killed by this petitioner with the help of co-accused persons.

¶18

Learned counsel has relied upon paragraph-57 and 244 of the case diary but did not controvert this fact that the similarly situated person i.e. Navin Kumar Das @ Navin Kumar has been enlarged on bail vide B.A. No. 6073 of 2024 vide order dated 12.08.2024.

¶19

Having heard the parties, perused the records of this case. 11. In the light of the persuasive submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and under the facts and circumstances of this case, the petitioner hereinabove is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court of learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Madhupur, in connection with Jasidih Rail P.S. Case No. 23 of 2023, subject to the condition that the petitioner will appear before the learned Court below on each and every date as and when required, failing which, appropriate order shall be passed by the learned Court below for the cancellation of the bail as per the provisions of law.

¶20

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

¶21

2 B.A. No.6235 of 2024

¶22

D.S.

Suchit Das Alias Bachu Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Suchit Das Alias Bachu Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Shankar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Laddu Singh Alias Saba Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Banti Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rinal Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Tinku Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chandra Lakshi Rai Alias C Lachi Rai Alias Chandra Lachi Rai Vs the State of Jharkhand