Dismissed

Subhankar v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC15 Nov 2021BA2/49/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Section 302 IPC, the court dismissed the application of a juvenile accused. It emphasized the gravity of the offence involving brutal assault of a fellow student by a wicket and bat, noting strong eyewitness evidence and prior failure to discharge proof of innocence. The second application was rejected. Pending matters were disposed. The order was passed on 15.11.202

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; pending matter disposed.

SL. No	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
			BA2 No.49 of 2021 Hon’ble R.C. Khulbe, J. Mrs. Pushpa Joshi, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Ms. Chetna Latwal, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. J. S. Virk, learned D.A.G. along with Mr. Rakesh Joshi, learned B.H. for the State. Accused–Subhankar has sought his release on bail in connection with Case Crime/FIR No.23/2019 u/s 302, 201 IPC, registered at P.S. Ranipokhri, District Dehradun. This is the second bail application and the first bail application has been dismissed vide order dated 28.11.2020. It is argued that the accused has been falsely implicated; the main culprits were the teacher and warden of the school who have been exonerated by the police; co-accused have been enlarged on bail; the accused has served more than two years in jail; his parents are also suffering from Leprosy; statement of the star witnesses have been recorded; there is no chance of tampering with the evidence; when the deceased was taken before the nurse posted in the institution not found any injury; the inquest report was also prepared in which no such injuries were found; suddenly, 17 injuries were found in post-mortem report, which is not possible; he is ready to furnish the sureties and may be granted bail. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed for bail. Admittedly, the accused; was below 18 years of age; and a student of the institution; the deceased was also student of the same institute; as per the statement of PW6 Dr. Ashish Bhatt, who conducted the post-mortem and prepared the report found, 16 anti-mortem injuries; PW1 Heera Gupta and PW2 Shyam Barik, who were the student of the same institution, clearly stated that on 10.03.2019, the deceased was brutally assaulted by the present

SL.
No

Date

Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
directions and
Registrar’s order
with Signatures

COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS

BA2 No.49 of 2021
Hon’ble R.C. Khulbe, J.
Mrs. Pushpa Joshi, learned Sr. Counsel
assisted by Ms. Chetna Latwal, learned counsel for
the applicant.
Mr. J. S. Virk, learned D.A.G. along with Mr.
Rakesh Joshi, learned B.H. for the State.
Accused–Subhankar has sought his release on
bail in connection with Case Crime/FIR No.23/2019
u/s 302, 201 IPC, registered at P.S. Ranipokhri,
District Dehradun.
This is the second bail application and the
first bail application has been dismissed vide order
dated 28.11.2020.
It is argued that the accused has been falsely
implicated; the main culprits were the teacher and
warden of the school who have been exonerated by
the police; co-accused have been enlarged on bail;
the accused has served more than two years in jail;
his parents are also suffering from Leprosy;
statement of the star witnesses have been recorded;
there is no chance of tampering with the evidence;
when the deceased was taken before the nurse
posted in the institution not found any injury; the
inquest report was also prepared in which no such
injuries were found; suddenly, 17 injuries were
found in post-mortem report, which is not possible;
he is ready to furnish the sureties and may be
granted bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State
opposed for bail.
Admittedly, the accused; was below 18 years
of age; and a student of the institution; the deceased
was also student of the same institute; as per the
statement of PW6 Dr. Ashish Bhatt, who conducted
the post-mortem and prepared the report found, 16
anti-mortem injuries; PW1 Heera Gupta and PW2
Shyam Barik, who were the student of the same
institution, clearly stated that on 10.03.2019, the
deceased was brutally assaulted by the present

accus used have also accor is not of.	ed and co-accused Laxman by wickets and bat for playing cricket; the wickets and bat also been recovered; the above star witnesses have identified both the accused before the Court; dingly, looking to the gravity of the offence, it a fit case for bail at this stage. The second bail application is thus, dismissed. Pending application, if any, stands disposed
Sukhbant	(R.C. Khulbe, J.) 15.11.2021

accus
used
have
also
accor
is not
of.

ed and co-accused Laxman by wickets and bat
for playing cricket; the wickets and bat also
been recovered; the above star witnesses have
identified both the accused before the Court;
dingly, looking to the gravity of the offence, it
a fit case for bail at this stage.
The second bail application is thus, dismissed.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed

Sukhbant

(R.C. Khulbe, J.)
15.11.2021

Subhankar v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhankar v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surendra Singh Rawat Vs State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home

Suraj Das Vs State of Uttarakhand

Intezar Vs State of Uttarakhnad

Surendra Kumar Gupta Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Shankar Giri Vs State of Uttarakhand

Dhan Giri Goswami Vs State of Uttarakhand