Allowed

Santosh Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Sept 2024B.A./6936/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application in a murder case arising from an FIR alleging ten accused killed a mason over suspicion of an illicit relation. The last-seen witness attributed specific roles to some accused but did not name the petitioner; hence bail was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Santosh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6936 of 2024

¶2

Santosh Kumhar, son of Heera Kumhar, aged about 38 years, resident of village Pandrani, PO & PS Tamar, District Ranchi. ..... … Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party

¶5

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

¶6

-----For the Petitioner : Md. Razaullah Ansari, Advocate For the State : Mr. V.S. Sahay, APP For the Informant : Mr. Asit Baran Mahata, Advocate Mr. Upendranath Mahto, Advocate

¶7

¶8

03/04.09.2024 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.

¶9

This bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant– Santosh Kumhar with prayer to release on bail in connection with Tamar P.S. Case No. 12 of 2024 (S.T. No.440/2024) registered under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned A.J.C XII, Ranchi.

¶10

The FIR of this case was lodged with these allegations that the father of informant who was mason had gone in search of reja (female labourer) and the labourer on 25.01.2024 at 07:30 in the evening. When he did not come back, he went to see his father to the house of Galu Devi @ Sukhoda Devi and also saw some persons assaulting to his father with tangi , farsa and brick. He told in regard to the occurrence to his family members. He alongwith his family members reached there and saw that his father was being carried away towards the jungle from the house of Galu Devi @ Sukhoda Devi by Gopal Kumhar, Dilip Kumhar, Shyam Kumhar, Bhagat Kumhar, Shiv Kumhar, Santosh Kumhar- petitioner herein, Mangal Kumhar and Indra Kumhar. On account of utter darkness, he did not chase his father. All these eight persons on account of suspicion of illicit relation of his father with Galu Devi @ Sukhoda Devi had taken his father to commit murder. While the search was being made by all the relatives at 10 O'clock in the

¶11

night just below the Chalan Godia in an agriculture field of Rote Singh Munda, the body of his father was found in injured condition, hence this FIR was lodged.

¶12

As per allegations made in the FIR itself, informant is the eye witness of part occurrence and also the last seen witness of the deceased with the accused persons. He in his restatement has reiterated all those allegations which were made by him in the written statement. Further, the part eye witness and also the witness of last seen is Galu Devi @ Sukhoda Devi, her statement was recorded under section 161 of Cr.PC wherein she has stated that deceased Sawna Kumhar was having love affairs with her for last 8-10 years. He was mason and she worked as reja kuli with him in order to earn her livelihood. On 25.01.2024, on some issue the fight took place between Sawna Kumhar and his gotia persons. In the evening in between 7 to 8 O'clock when Sawna Kumhar had come to her house at the same time the wife of Ajit Kumhar had told him that Sawna Kumhar had come. At the same time, Gopal Kumhar, Indra Kumhar, Mangal Kumhar, Bhagat Kumhar, Dilip Kumhar, Prem Kumhar, Ajay Kumhar, Shyam Kumhar, Mohin Kumhar and Ajit Kumhar as well came there. Gopal Kumhar was armed with the farsa. He hit the farsa at the door of her house whereby the door was broken, thereafter, all these accused persons intruded in the house. Gopal Kumhar and other accused persons had pushed her and nabbed Sawna Kumhar and took him towards the Dora river in an agriculture field.

¶13

Galu Devi @ Sukhoda Devi is also the eye witness of part occurrence and also the witness of last seen, she has attributed specific role to some accused out of the 10 accused persons. In regard to assaulting to Sawna Kumhar and also pushing her; while all the 10 accused persons named in her statement had taken to Sawna Kumhar with them.

¶14

The time gape being very less between the last seen and the death of deceased, in view of the postmortem the very perpetrator of murder of the deceased were these 10 accused persons who had taken deceased from the house of Galu Devi @ Sukhoda Devi. Among those persons named by Galu Devi @ Sukhoda Devi the name of present petitioner does not figure. In postmortem report there are ten ante-mortem injuries caused

¶15

¶16

by the sharp edged weapon.

¶17

In view of the above, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in aforesaid case.

¶18

(Subhash Chand, J.)

¶19

RKM

¶20

Santosh Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar 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

Dibru Sundi Alias Kadia Sundi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sarwan Kumar Alias Shrawan Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Prabir Dey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Munna Adhikari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vicky Nigam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shivam Kumar Hajam Vs the State of Jharkhand