Allowed

Rajesh Hansda @ Rajesh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC29 Nov 2021CR. MISC./16019/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge Kerala High Court allowed bail applications for five accused persons charged with multiple offences under the IPC, including section 354B and 354C, citing a concurrent order for a co-accused and rejecting arguments for adjournment.

What did the court decide?

The accused released on bail on fortibtle surety of Rs.15,000/- each on furnishing surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Katihar with conditi

Rajesh Hansda @ Rajesh Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12789 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2020 Thana- DANDKHORA District- Katihar

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Sharwan Kumar Mariya @ Sharwan Kumar @ Shrawan Kumar Maraiya, S/O Birju Maraiya, R/o village- Kelabari Santhali Tola, P.S.- Dandkhora, DistrictKatihar

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

======================================================

¶10

with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 16019 of 2021

¶11

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2020 Thana- DANDKHORA District- Katihar

¶12

======================================================

¶13

Rajesh Hansda @ Rajesh, S/o Dasho Hansda, R/o village- Kelabari Santhali Tola, P.S.- Dandkhora, District- Katihar

¶14

Ganga Ram Basuki, S/o Narayan Basuki, R/o village- Kelabari Santhali Tola, P.S.- Dandkhora, District- Katihar

¶15

Puran Hansada @ Puran Murmum, S/o Tala Murmum, R/o village- Kelabari Santhali Tola, P.S.- Dandkhora, District- Katihar

¶16

Sunil Hembram @ Sunil Tuddu, S/o Late Mangal Hembram @ Mangal Tuddu, R/o village- Kelabari Santhali Tola, P.S.- Dandkhora, DistrictKatihar

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶21

====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 12789 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bimal Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 16019 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bimal Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. M. BADAR ORAL ORDER

¶22

7 29-11-2021 The applicants/accused in Crime No. 89 of 2020

¶23

registered with Dandkhora Police Station for the offences

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12789 of 2021(7) dt.29-11-2021 2/5

¶25

punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 341, 342, 323, 324, 326, 354(B), 285, 327, 386, 294, 504, 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code at the instance of first informant Phulmani Devi, by these applications are seeking their release on bail during the pendency of the trial. The applicants/accused are stated to be behind bars from September, 2020.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicants/accused. He argued that one of the co-accused with similar role, namely, Bhajan @ Bhajan Murmu is directed to be released on bail vide order dated 07.09.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 34892 of 2021. The learned counsel for the applicants/accused has filed supplementary affidavit today annexing the said order passed by this Court. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the trial will take its own time and the injuries suffered by victim named Babloo Kumar Mahto are simple in nature.

¶27

The learned Additional Public Prosecutors in these cases are asking for adjournment by stating that case diary is not received by them.

¶28

The request for adjournment is refused in light of Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hussain and Ors. Vs. Union of India reported in (2017) 5

¶29

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12789 of 2021(7) dt.29-11-2021 3/5

¶30

SCC 702 .

¶31

I have considered the submissions so advanced and also perused the case diary of the instant case which is on record of this case.

¶32

It is averred by the victim, who lodged the First Information Report of the incident dated 01.09.2020 on 06.09.2020 that on 01.09.2020 at about 9 P.M., she was having talk with a person named Bablu Kumar Mahto in her matrimonial house. At that time, her brother-in-law, i.e, applicant Sharwan Kumar Mariya came along with other applicants/accused Rajesh Hansda, Ganga Ram Basuki, Puran Hansda and Sunil Hambram and other co-accused such as Bhajan, Ramesh as well as 50 to 60 unknown persons. They all had beaten her as well as Bablu Kumar Mahto by tying them to a pole. Bablu Kumar Mahto was also branded during course of the incident by means of iron rod.

¶33

The Investigation of the crime in question is over. The injuries suffered by Bablu Kumar Mahto are stated to be simple in nature by the Medial Officer as per certificate found in the case diary. Co-accused with identical role namely, Bhajan @ Bhajan Murmu is directed to be released on bail by this Court vide order dated 07.09.2021 passed in Criminal

¶34

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12789 of 2021(7) dt.29-11-2021 4/5

¶35

Misc. No. 34892 of 2021 and hence, the order :-

¶36

i. The application is allowed.

¶37

ii. The applicants/accused in Crime No. 89 of 2020 registered with Dandkhora Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 341, 342, 323, 324, 326, 354(B), 285, 327, 386, 294, 504, 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code be released on bail on executing P.R. bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each on furnishing surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SubDivisional Judicial Magistrate, Katihar with the following conditions: -

¶38

(I) The applicants/accused should not extend any threat, promise of inducement to the persons acquainted with the facts of the accusation against him so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶39

(II) The applicants/accused shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, their bail bond shall be liable to be forfeited by the court below.

¶40

(III) The applicants/accused should not contact

¶41

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12789 of 2021(7) dt.29-11-2021 5/5

¶42

the members of the prosecuting party as well as witnesses in this case in any manner till conclusion of the trial.

¶43

(IV) The applicants should not repeat

¶44

commission of similar offence in future and if he is found to be involved in commission of similar offence, the State is at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail granted to the applicants in the instant case.

¶45

The applicants to remove all office objections forthwith and the Registry to issue bail-writ as per this order only after removal of office objections by the appellant/accused.

¶46

(A. M. Badar, J)

¶47

Bhardwaj/-

¶48

U T

Rajesh Hansda @ Rajesh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Hansda @ Rajesh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

MD Fateh @ Fateh @ Istiyak Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Pappu Mukhiya Vs the State of Bihar

Raju Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Sarfarazuddin @ Md. Sarfarajuddin Vs The Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi.