Sunil Kimbo @ Sunil Kingo vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 28 January, 2021

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Sunil Kimbo @ Sunil Kingo vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 28 January, 2021

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                       B. A. No. 11915 of 2020

                  Sunil Kimbo @ Sunil Kingo                    ...         Petitioner
                                                      Versus
                  The State of Jharkhand                       ...      Opposite Party


         Coram:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

             For the Petitioner                 : Mr. Gautam Kumar , Adv.
             For the State                      : Ms. Vandana Bharti, Addl. P.P.




02 / 28.01.2021

Heard the parties through Video Conferencing.

Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

In view of the personal undertaking given by learned counsel for the petitioner the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter are ignored for the present.

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sessions Trial No. 277 of 2018 arising out of Rail Chakardharpur (Manoharpur) P.S. case no. 14 of 2018 registered under Sections 304 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being the driver of a dumper, deliberately drove the dumper over the labourers and caused injury to the brother of the informant, who died during course of his treatment. It is then submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that only two out of five charge-sheeted witnesses have been examined out of whom P.W.1 has not named the petitioner in his deposition and PW2 has not supported the case of the prosecution and was declared hostile and even though the prosecution put leading question to P.W.2, he denied the suggestion that he stated before the police that the petitioner was the driver of the dumper. It is then submitted that no motive is attributed to the petitioner for killing the deceased. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 07.07.2018 as mentioned in paragraph 1 of the bail application and the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be released on bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the facts of the case, the petitioner 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 learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in connection with Sessions Trial No. 277 of 2018 arising out of Rail Chakardharpur (Manoharpur) P.S. case no. 14 of 2018 subject to the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case.

(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Smita/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court