Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Paras Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 31 July, 2018

Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.942 of 2018
                                     ------
   Paras Yadav                            ....       ....   ....   Appellant
                                     Versus
   1. The State of Jharkhand
   2. Santi Devi                              ....   ....   .... Respondents
                                     ------
CORAM     : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
                                       ------
   For the Appellant            : Mr. S.K. Singh, Advocate
   For the State                : Addl. P.P.
                                ------
   Order No.03 Dated- 31.07.2018

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. Though notice was issued to the respondent no.2, yet, no one turns up on behalf of respondent no.2.

The appellant has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the order dated 28.05.2018, passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with Patan P.S. Case No. 29 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 508 of 2016 registered under section 364/34 of the Indian Penal Code but thereafter on application of Investigating Officer under Section 379/376D/302/201/149 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3/4 of the Schedule Castes & Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was added in the F.I.R. whereby and where under, the prayer for regular bail of the appellant was rejected.

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned court below failed to take note of the fact that the appellant has been in custody since 03.06.2016 and except the confessional statement and the appellant leading to recovery of wearing apparel of the deceased, there is no other evidence in record to implicate the appellant in this case in the alleged offence though 12 out total 13 witnesses of the case have been examined in the case. It is further submitted that the co-accused of the appellant namely Ramjeet @ Ramjeet Mehta has been granted bail by this court vide order dated 10.04.2018 in Criminal Appeal (Single Judge) No.1296 of 2016. Hence, it is submitted that the impugned order of learned court below be set aside and the appellant be released on bail.

The learned Addl. P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the learned counsels and the facts of the case, this Court is of the considered view that this is fit case where the above named appellant be released on bail. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 28.05.2018, passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with Patan P.S. Case No. 29 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 508 of 2016 being not sustainable in law is set aside and the appellant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Patan P.S. Case No. 29 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 508 of 2016 during the pendency of the case.

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed.

Gunjan-                             (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)