Hadi Munda Alias Sanika Pahan Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1069 of 2024

------

Hadi Munda @ Sanika Pahan, aged about-25 years, Son of Turam Pahan, Resident of Village-Kojrong P.O. & P.S. Saiko, District-Khunti

¶4

…. …. Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opposite Party

¶7

CORAM : HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI

¶8

------ For the Appellant : Mr. S.K. Vishwakarma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, APP ------ 02/Dated: 04.09.2024

¶9

1. The instant appeal preferred under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, is directed against the order dated 28.06.2024 passed in MCA No.196 of 2024 by the learned District Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Khunti, in connection with S.T. No.200 of 2023, arising out of Saiko P.S. Case No.04 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. No.324 of 2018(s), registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 302, 201, 435, 427 & 120B of the IPC, Section 27 of the Arms Act , Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act and Section 13 of the U.A.(P) Act, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for regular bail of the appellant has been rejected.

¶10

2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that the appellant is absolutely innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case.

¶11

3. It has further been contended that there is no recovery of any incriminating material from the physical or conscious possession of the

¶12

¶13

appellant.

¶14

4. It has also been contended that the identically placed co-accused persons, namely, Dibar Munda @ Dilbar Munda, Ajay Lohra, Kunwar Munda @ Rode Munda, Many Munda @ Atwa Munda @ Manay Munda @ Etwa Munda, Chamu Lohra and Tarjan @ Mangan Pahan have already been directed to be released on bail by this Court vide orders dated 26.09.2019, 09.02.2022, 01.04.2022, 14.11.2019, 13.09.2019 and 31.01.2020 passed in B.A. Nos.8740 of 2019, 13731 of 2021, 1980 of 2022, 6258 of 2019, 5060 of 2019 and 331 of 2020 respectively.

¶15

5. While on the other hand, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. However, he is fair enough to admit the fact that the cases of the aforesaid co-accused persons as referred above, who have already been directed to be released on bail by this Court, are identically placed to that of the case of the present appellant.

¶16

6. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court, is of the view that identically placed co-accused persons, namely, Dibar Munda @ Dilbar Munda, Ajay Lohra, Kunwar Munda @ Rode Munda, Many Munda @ Atwa Munda @ Manay Munda @ Etwa Munda, Chamu Lohra and Tarjan @ Mangan Pahan, have already been directed to be released on bail by this Court vide orders dated 26.09.2019, 09.02.2022, 01.04.2022, 14.11.2019, 13.09.2019 and 31.01.2020 passed in B.A. Nos.8740 of 2019, 13731 of 2021, 1980 of 2022, 6258 of 2019, 5060 of 2019 and 331 of 2020 respectively, therefore, there is no reason to take distinct view, so far as the case of the present

¶17

¶18

appellant is concerned.

¶19

7. Considering the aforesaid fact, this Court is of the view that the impugned order needs to be interfered with.

¶20

8. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 28.06.2024 passed in M.C.A. No.196/2024 by the learned District Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Khunti, is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶21

9. In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed. 10. In consequence thereof, the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Khunti, in connection with S.T. No.200 of 2023, arising out of Saiko P.S. Case No.04 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. No.324 of 2018(s), subject to the conditions that the appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent himself on the date fixed without any cogent cause; and shall not commit offence of the like nature. In failure, the learned court shall have liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law so that trial, be not hindered and further that one of the bailors should be close relative of the appellant, which is to be accompanied by affidavit justifying that such bailor is close relative of the appellant.

¶22

11. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of.

¶23

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, A.C.J.)

¶24

(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)

¶25

Rohit/-

¶26

Hadi Munda Alias Sanika Pahan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hadi Munda Alias Sanika Pahan 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

Shreya Kumari Tirkey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Umaayush Multicom Pvt. Ltd. Thro One of Its Driectors Shri Lalan Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

M/S Central Coal Field Limited through Its Authorized Signatory Jobi Vp Vs Basanti Bai

M/S Maa Tara Stone Works through Its Proprietor Namely Sunil Kumar Singh Vs State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Deptt of State Tax

Mithun Kumar Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dhananjay Singh Alias Abhimanyu Jee Vs the State of Jharkhand