Allowed

Kunti Bhunini v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Sept 2024B.A./7484/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application by two accused named in an FIR for a killing by villagers, alleging omnibus allegations without specific overt acts and parity with co-accused already granted bail. The State did not controvert parity. The court enlarged both petitioners on bail on furnishing bail bonds with two sureties each, subject to cooperation in trial.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners enlarged on bail on Rs.25,000/- bail bond each with two like sureties, subject to cooperation in the criminal proceeding and attendance at every date of trial.

Kunti Bhunini Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7484 of 2024

¶2

Kunti Bhunini @ Kunti Devi @ Kunti Bhuiya

¶3

Sajan Bhuiya @ Sajan Kumar

¶4

... … Petitioners

¶5

Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party

¶6

¶7

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

¶8

-----For the Petitioners : Mr. Mukesh Bihari Lal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, A.P.P.

¶9

¶10

Order No. 04 / Dated 03^rd September, 2024

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.

¶12

The petitioners are accused in connection with Nirsa P.S. Case No. 195 of 2019 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 440 of 2023, registered under Sections 147/148/341/342/323/325/302/149 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge-XVI, Dhanbad. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the allegations as set out in the F.I.R. are that one person was killed by villagers and several persons have been named in the F.I.R. along with 20 named persons and 8090 unknown persons. It is submitted that entire allegations are omnibus and general in nature and no specific overt act has been attributed against any one of the petitioners. Further it has been submitted that although both the petitioners have been named but no specific overt act has been attributed against any one of them and the similarly situated co-accused persons namely Basant Bauri vide B.A. No. 2096 of 2021 dated 02.03.2021, Deepak Kumar Bhuia @ Deepu Bhuia & Sonu Bhuia @ Sannu Bhuia vide B.A. No. 9155 of 2021 dated 05.10.2021, Shankar Bhuiyan vide B.A. No. 8652 of 2021 dated 21.09.2021, Gautam Bauri & Karan Bhuiya vide B.A. No. 8147 of 2020 dated 14.10.2020, Ashok Kumar Bhuia @ Ashok Bhuia, Pandey Bhuiyan & Ajoy Kumar @ Ajoy Kumar Bhuiyan vide B.A. No. 8129 of 2021 dated 06.09.2021, Urmila Devi vide B.A. No. 10982 of 2022 dated 20.12.2022 and Monti Bhuiya @ Elha Bhuiya @ Elha Bhnia & Rama Bouri vide B.A. No. 6636 of 2022 dated 30.06.2022 who have also been named in

¶13

the F.I.R. have been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It has been submitted that these petitioners have no criminal history as disclosed in paragraph no. 11 of the present bail application and these two petitioners are in jail since 10.07.2024. Charge-sheet in this case has been submitted and therefore possibility of tampering the evidence is very remote and therefore these petitioners deserve to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners and submitted that both the petitioners were absconding for a long period of time although they have been named in the F.I.R. but learned A.P.P. did not controvert this fact that similarly situated co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

¶15

Having heard the parties, perused the records of this case. 6. In light of the forceful submission advanced on behalf of the petitioners and under the facts and circumstances of this case, these petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge-XVI, Dhanbad, in connection with Nirsa P.S. Case No. 195 of 2019 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 440 of 2023, subject to the condition that the petitioners will cooperate in the criminal proceeding pending in the learned Trial Court and they will remain present on each and every date of the criminal trial 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 provision of law.

¶16

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

¶17

Basant/S. Das

¶18

2 B.A. No.7484 of 2024

Kunti Bhunini v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunti Bhunini 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

Anil Kumar Alias Anil Rajput Vs the State of Jharkhand

Karimul Sheikh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ankush Vastayayan Alias Ankush Vatsyayan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shriram Angariya Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kuldeep Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bhutnath Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand