Dismissed¶17

Kiran Kumari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC13 Dec 2024B.A./7786/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail rejected; murder case under Sections 302, 201/34 IPC; Sukhdeo Nagar P.S. Case No. 287/2024; pending before Sri Vikram Anand, J.M.F.C-XXXI, Ranchi; deceased found hanging after telephonic complaint of assault; postmortem: seven abrasions plus ligature mark; no trace of liquor in abdomen; dying declaration regarding cause of death; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; Ambuj Nath, J.; B.A. No. 7786 of 2024; decided 13.12.2024.

What did the court decide?

From the postmortem report, the abrasion marks on the deceased indicate that he was subjected to murder. ¶16

Kiran Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7786 of 2024

¶2

------

¶3

Kiran Kumari, aged about 35 years, D/o. Shartrughan Ram, R/o. Sarovar Nagar, Road No.-03, P.O.- Hehal, P.S.- Sukhdeo Nagar, Ratu Road, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner

¶4

-Versus -

¶5

The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party

¶6

¶7

CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH

¶8

For the Petitioner	------ : Mr. Vishal Kumar, Advocate : M/s. Ankita Kumari, Advocate
For the State	: M/s. Amrita Kumari, A.P.P.
For the Informant	: Mrs. Shivram Singh, Advocate ------

¶9

05/13.12.2024

¶10

Heard the parties.

¶11

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sukhdeo Nagar P.S. Case No. 287/2024, for the offences registered under Sections 302, 201/34 of the I.P.C., pending in the Court of Sri Vikram Anand, learned J.M.F.C-XXXI, Ranchi.

¶12

On 25.05.2024, the deceased has called her sister and informed her that this petitioner and other persons had brutally assaulted him. Thereafter, the deceased was found hanging in his house.

¶13

From the postmortem report, it appears that as many as seven abrasions were found on the persons of deceased apart from ligature mark.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the deceased and petitioner used to reside separately. It was further submitted that the deceased under the influence of liquor had tried to enter in the house of the petitioner where some scuffle happened, due to which he sustained his injuries.

¶15

From the postmortem report, it is apparent that the deceased has sustained abrasions marks which indicate that he was subjected to murder. It further appears that the doctor who had performed the postmortem of the deceased did not find any trace of liquor in his abdomen.

¶16

The deceased has made a dying declaration about the cause of death.

¶17

Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

¶18

(Ambuj Nath, J.)

¶19

Rahul/-

Kiran Kumari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiran Kumari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nasir Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rahul Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dilip Murmu Vs State of Jharkhand

Manish Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suresh Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sudhir Kumar Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand