Jharkhand High Court
Munshi Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 August, 2017
Author: H. C. Mishra
Bench: H. C. Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B. A. No. 5554 of 2017
Munshi Mahto ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party
--------
CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Prem Pujari Roy, Advocate.
For the State : A.P.P.
------
2/4.8.2017Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sadar P.S case No. 1170 of 2015 corresponding to G.R No.4291 of 2015, S.T No.85 of 2016, for the offence under Sections 364, 302, 201, 120-B / 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The case relates to abduction of the father of the informant who was subsequently murdered. The confessional statement of the petitioner was recorded, in which, he accepted that he had given the contract for killing the deceased and after the deceased had been murdered, he paid rupees four lacs to the accused persons, on the basis of which, the contract killers were apprehended and from them, the part of the contract money had also been recovered. Earlier the bail applications of this petitioner was rejected on merits thrice.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has renewed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 16.10.2015 and even the charge has not yet been framed in the case.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Munshi Mahto, on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is hereby rejected.
If the submission of the learned counsel is true, that the charge has not yet been framed, the Trial Court is directed to frame the charge and proceed with the trial, if necessary, by splitting the trial of this petitioner.
(H. C. Mishra, J.) BS/