Jharkhand High Court
Ashok Sharma vs The State Of Jharkhand ...... Opposite ... on 24 November, 2021
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B. A. No. 10126 of 2021
.....
Ashok Sharma ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kr. Dash, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, A.P.P.
.....
The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the parties had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.
.....
04/24.11.2021 Defects, as pointed out by the office, are ignored.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner is accused in connection with Ghatsila P. S. Case No. 17 of 2006 corresponding to G. R. No. 75 of 2006 (S.T. No. 111-A/2014) registered under Section 364 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is submitted that the petitioner is innocent. It is further submitted that petitioner has been named on mere suspicion by the informant. It is further submitted that trial is in progress. It is further submitted that the petitioner in custody since 28.03.2017 and hence he may be enlarged on bail.
Learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that informant has shown direct suspicion against this petitioner in the FIR and charge sheet has been submitted. It is submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender. It is submitted that the trial is in progress and as such, bail application of the petitioner is fit to be rejected.
From perusal of the FIR and the order passed by the learned Court below, it appears that the petitioner is named in the FIR with other co-accused persons. It would also appear from the report of the learned Court below dated 08.11.2021 that charge sheet has been submitted against this petitioner and charges have already been framed against this petitioner on 17.08.2017. From perusal of the report of the learned Trial Court dated 08.11.2021, it appears that there are six charge-sheeted witnesses and one witness namely Prabha Devi has died and altogether four witnesses have been examined from the side of prosecution. It also appears that Investigation Officer is yet to be examined ands to secure the examination of Investigating Officer, reminder letter has been issued by the learned Court below through Senior Superintendent of Police, Jamshedpur. It also appears that Presiding Officer has joined at Ghatshila under order of transfer in the month of September, 2021 and trial is in progress.
In view of the above, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Hence, his prayer for bail is rejected.
However, trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as early as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.) Kamlesh/