Samiruddin Alias Chottu Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No.6860 of 2024

Samiruddin @ Chhotu Aged about 35 years, Son of late Jamaluddin, Resident of Gauri Residency, Morabadi, PO & PS Bariatu, District Ranchi.

¶4

..... … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party

¶7

With

¶8

B.A. No.6650 of 2024

¶9

Prateek Singh @ Prateek, aged about 34 years, son of Upendra Prasad, Resident of Seva Sansar Apartment, Flat No. 7D, B Block, Ramgarh, PO & PS Ramgarh, District Ramgarh. ..... … Petitioner

¶10

Versus

¶11

The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party

¶12

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

¶13

-----For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate [B.A. No. 6650/24] Mr. Sidharth Sudhanshu, Advocate [B.A. No. 6860/24] For the State : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, APP [B.A. No. 6860/24] Mr. Vishwanath Roy, APP [B.A. No. 6650/24] --------

¶14

03/16.08.2024 Since both the bail applications arise out of the same FIR case crime number, they are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned APPs for the State. 3. The instant bail applications have been filed on behalf of the applicants–Samiruddin @ Chhotu and Prateek Singh @ Prateek with the prayer to release on bail in connection with Chutia P.S. Case No.117 of 2024 registered under Sections 302, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of Arms Act, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Ranchi.

¶16

As per allegations made in FIR, on 26.05.2024 at 8:30 of clock

¶17

made the entry at the gate of Xtreme Sports Bar & Grill Abhishek Singh alongwith his six companions all in intoxicated state of mind and after having drunk wine Abhishek Singh alongwith his associates came to the dance floor whereby the some female customers who were earlier on the dance floor felt themselves helpless and complaint was made to the informant who alongwith bouncers reached there and asked Abhishek Singh and his associate to go from dance floor. Some fight took place thereafter all were made out from the bar. One of them was too intoxicated that he fell down on the ground and rest of his associates went away. Thereafter, Abhishek Singh alongwith his associates began to hurl abuse to the staff of informant at the bar and also began to assault with lathi & danda. The police was also called on phone. Before reaching the police there the accused Abhishek Singh alongwith his friends leaving one who was too intoxicated went away from there. The person who was too intoxicated was identified as Samiruddin @ Chhotu. Police took him with them and at 12 O'clock the bar was closed, staff were to go their house. One DJ operator Sandeep Kumar Pramanik @ DJ Sandy was going to his house as he came out at 1 Hour 18 minutes near the lift the bullet sound was heard which also hit to the mirror of the bar and police was also informed. The injured body of DJ operator Sandeep Kumar Pramanik @ DJ Sandy was lying on the floor who was taken to Hospital, RIMS where he was declared dead. In CCTV footage it was identified that at 1 Hours 18 minuets it was Abhishek Singh who was armed with rifle and was also awaiting near by the lift as soon as DJ Sandeep Kumar Pramanik @ DJ Sandy came he shot him. As such all the accused persons under a conspiracy has committed the said offence, this FIR was lodged.

¶18

Admittedly in view of CCTV footage it was only Abhishek Singh who had shot to DJ operator Sandeep Kumar Pramanik @ Sandy and no one his associate was at that time even the witness Uday Shankar Singh, Tusar Kantidas, Vishal Singh all have also stated that it was Abhishek Singh who had shot DJ Sandeep Kumar Pramanik @ Sandy.

¶19

So far as the first and second occurrence of marpit are concerned the involvement of both the petitioners is shown; but in opening

¶20

2

¶21

fire to the deceased it was only Abhishek Singh, nonetheless was there. 7. In view of the above, the bail applications of the petitioners are hereby allowed. Let the applicants be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in aforesaid cases.

¶22

(Subhash Chand, J.)

¶23

RKM

¶24

3

Samiruddin Alias Chottu v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samiruddin Alias Chottu 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

Sita Ram Manjhi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rakesh Kumbhakar Alias Rajesh Kumbhakar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Niranjan Ahir Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dharmendra Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ankush Kumar Thakur Alias Ankush Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand

Prabhat Kumar Yadav Alias Afjal Alias Marandi Alias Abhishek Jee Vs the State of Jharkhand