Dismissed¶13

Daya Shankar Saha Alias Guddu Saha Alias Guddu v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC19 Jun 2024B.A./626/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi; BA No. 626 of 2024; Daya Shankar Saha @ Guddu Saha @ Guddu v. State of Jharkhand; bail application rejected at this stage; subsequent/repeat bail application after nine months; earlier rejection in BA No. 6584 of 2023 (13.9.2023); charge sheet submitted; 'last seen' basis; no eyewitness contention; CDR-based location at place of occurrence; 65 calls to deceased; informant's allegation re daughter–deceased relationship and threat; custody since 23.6.2023; Ranga PS Case No. 26 of 2023; Ratnaker Bhengra, J.; order dated 19th June, 2024.

What did the court decide?

Having heard the learned counsels for the parties, and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court was not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. ¶12

Daya Shankar Saha Alias Guddu Saha Alias Guddu Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

(Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction)

¶3

BA No. 626 of 2024 Daya Shankar Saha @ Guddu Saha @ Guddu … … Petitioner Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party

¶5

------ CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA

¶6

------For the Petitioner : Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad,APP For the Informant : Mr. Pratiush Lala, Advocate -------- Order No.06/Dated: 19th June, 2024

¶7

When the matter is called out, the learned counsels for the parties have

¶8

appeared.

¶9

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that earlier bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.9.2023 passed in BA No. 6584 of 2023 and the petitioner has come up again after nine months. He has further stated that now charge sheet has been submitted however he has submitted that no incriminating article has been found from the possession of the petitioner. Apparently it is a case of only last seen and only on that basis petitioner cannot be held responsible for the alleged offence. Petitioner and deceased were known to each other and due to earlier dispute between them the petitioner has been implicated in this case. There is no eyewitness to the occurrence and the petitioner is in custody since 23.6.2023, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶10

The learned counsel for the informant has submitted that there is no fresh ground for considering the bail application as earlier the same has been rejected on merit. He has further stated that in paragraph no. 62 of the case diary it is indicated that there was relationship between daughter of the petitioner and the deceased and when the petitioner came to know about it he said that he will kill the deceased.

¶11

The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as per CDR the location of the petitioner was found at the place of occurrence and he has also communicated with the deceased as many as 65 times.

¶12

Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail in connection with Ranga PS Case No. 26 of 2023.

¶13

Accordingly, his prayer for bail stands rejected, at this stage.

¶14

KNR (Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)

Daya Shankar Saha Alias Guddu Saha Alias Guddu v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daya Shankar Saha Alias Guddu Saha Alias Guddu 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

Vinod Kharia 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

Margaret Murmu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanjay Kumar Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suraj Rajwar Vs the State of Jharkhand