Jharkhand High Court
Sulendra Lohra vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite ... on 15 July, 2020
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 3272 of 2020
Sulendra Lohra ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite Party
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY Through Video Conferencing
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Chaturvedy, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Tapas Roy, A.P.P
---
Order No. 04 Dated 15th July, 2020
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. Defects, as pointed out by the office, are ignored. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Bano P.S. Case No. 01 of 2020, pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Simdega.
It has been alleged that the daughter of the informant had gone to attend the dance program near the house of Ajay Lohra to celebrate new year. She did not return and subsequently her dead body was found in a pond.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the articles purportedly recovered from the pond were not put on Test Identification Parade and therefore, it cannot be ascertained that the articles belong to the deceased. It has further been stated that the petitioner was arrested after the recovery was made and therefore, it cannot be said that the confession of the petitioner led to a recovery.
Mr. Tapas Roy, learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Perusal of the case diary reveals confession of the petitioner which is at para 51 of the same and consequent to the confession the mobile as well as under garments were recovered as per para 54 of the case diary. As per C.D.R. the tower location of the mobile of the petitioner and the deceased were found at the same time near the place of occurrence which is recorded at para 46 of the case diary.
Such facts indicate strong circumstances regarding the involvement of the petitioner in committing the murder of the daughter of the informant. In such view of the matter, therefore, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is hereby rejected.
(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY,J.) Rajnish