Application for bail rejected by the High Court of Jharkhand. Despite the daughter's revised testimony implicating the petitioner in her mother's death, the court found the petitioner remained a common factor in both statements and declined to grant bail.
Bail prayer rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 7525 of 2024
Ashish Kumar @ Aashish Kumar, R/o Behind Jharkhand School, Ward No. 32, Laxmingar, P.O. Hehal, P.S. Sukhdeo Nagar, Dist. Ranchi. ----Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand --- --- Opposite Party ---
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --For the Petitioner : Mr. Bibhash Sinha, Adv. For the O.P : Mr. Satish Prasad, A.P.P.
06/18.09.2024 Heard Mr. Bibhash Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Satish Prasad, learned A.P.P.
The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected in
B.A. No. 10423 of 2021.
It has been submitted that the daughter of the petitioner has been examined during trial as P.W.5 and apart from the petitioner, she has also implicated the parents of the petitioner as having strangulated her mother. Learned counsel therefore submits that in view of the apparent development made in the story by the daughter of the petitioner, who is a tutored witness being in the custody of her maternal grandparents such evidence cannot be relied upon, therefore, the petitioner deserves to be released on bail. It has also been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 29.06.2020.
Mr. Satish Prasad, learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
It has been alleged that the wife of the petitioner was done to death by him and in the 164 Cr.P.C. of his daughter, she has categorically stated that it was the petitioner, who has strangulated her mother.
Even though there appears to be some development in the prosecution case as per the statement of the daughter, who has been examined as P.W.5, but the involvement of the petitioner appears to be a common factor in her 164 Cr.P.C. statement as well as in her evidence as P.W.5. In such circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is hereby rejected.
( Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
Preet/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted given the petitioner's long-term custody and alleged shift in the daughter's testimony regarding the mother's death.
Ashish Kumar @ Aashish Kumar
The State of Jharkhand
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
