Bail appeals in a murder case under IPC Sections 302, 201, 120B/34 and SC/ST Act Section 3(2)(v), arising from the death of the appellant's second wife. Bail of Dildar Ansari rejected given he was the husband of the deceased; Sareja Khatoon, not named in the FIR like co-accused already bailed, was granted bail with conditions.
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 Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 520 of 2023
Dildar Ansari ….. Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Shushma Kumari 3. Rebika Paharin ..... Respondents With Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 440 of 2023 --------- Sareja Khatoon ….. Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Shushma Kumari ..... Respondents ---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
--------- For the Appellants : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. S. K. Sinha, A.P.P Ms. Priya Shrestha, Spl.P.P
05/Dated: 22.03.2024
Both these appeals arising out of the same police case and as such, they are being disposed of by this common order.
Heard the parties.
Appellants have been made accused in connection with Borio P.S. Case No.320 of 2022, arising out of S.C/ST Case No.11 of 2023, for the offences registered under Sections 302, 201 and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, pending in the court of Sri Dheeraj Kumar, learned Special Judge (SC/ST Court), Sahibganj.
Both the appellants are husband and wife. The appellant Sareja Khatoon is the first wife of the appellant Dildar Ansari. Deceased Rebika Paharin is the second wife of Dildar Ansari. Rebika Paharin belonged to SC/ST Community, due to which, the family members of Dildar Ansari opposed his marriage with her.
It is alleged that the accused persons sent Rebika Paharin to the house of Manul Ansari and spread rumour that she had gone somewhere. Subsequently, pieces of her dead body was found from a public place.
From the case diary, it appears that the accused persons were forcing the deceased to convert into Islam and when she refused, she was murdered.
-2-
It was submitted that other similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr.Appeal (SJ) No.220/2023. These accused were granted bail because they are not named in the F.I.R. It was further submitted that the appellant Sareja Khatoon is also not named in the F.I.R.
Considering the facts of the case and also considering the fact that the appellant Dildar Ansari was the husband of the deceased, I am not inclined to enlarge him on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of bail is hereby rejected.
However, the appellant Sareja Khatoon is concerned, her case stands on similar footing with that of co-accused who have been granted bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. Accordingly, appellant, Sareja Khatoon, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Sri Dheeraj Kumar, learned Special Judge (SC/ST Court), Sahibganj, in connection with Borio P.S. Case No.320 of 2022, arising out of S.C/ST Case No.11 of 2023.
(Ambuj Nath, J.)
BS/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Dildar Ansari, husband of the deceased, should be enlarged on bail in a murder and SC/ST Act case.
Whether Sareja Khatoon, not named in the FIR like co-accused granted bail, should be released on bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dildar Ansari
The State of Jharkhand
Shushma Kumari
Rebika Paharin
Sareja Khatoon
Ambuj Nath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
