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 3, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Jitan Tudu And Anr vs The State Of Jharkhand on 5 November, 2015

Author: H. C. Mishra

Bench: H. C. Mishra

      IN       THE     HIGH    COURT    OF   JHARKHAND                    AT      RANCHI
                         B. A. No. 8327 of 2015
      1. Jitan Tudu
      2. Laghu Hembrom
        @ Gadda Hembrom                                   .....   ...    Petitioners
                                     Versus
      The State of Jharkhand                             ..... ...      Opposite Party
                                  --------
               CORAM        :   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA
                                  ------
      For the Petitioners         :        Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate
      For the State               :        A.P.P.
                                  --------

03/ 05.11.2015

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners have been made accused for the offences under Sections 302, 201 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Meharma (Thakurgangti) P.S. Case No. 1 of 2015 corresponding to G.R. No. 5 of 2015.

The case relates to murder of the father of the informant, who had gone to realise his money due from the petitioner Jitan Tudu. His dead body was found and the case was instituted against unknown.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and has accordingly, prayed for bail.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has pointed out from the case diary that in the self-implicating confessional statement of the petitioner Jitan Tudu, it is stated that both these petitioners had strangulated the deceased and thereafter the petitioner Laghu Hembrom had taken out one eye of the deceased with the help of a knife, and on the basis of this confessional statement, the knife was recovered from the house of the petitioner Laghu Hembrom, on his pointing out.

In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners, Jitan Tudu and Laghu Hembrom @ Gadda Hembrom, on bail. Accordingly, their prayer for bail is rejected.

( H. C. Mishra, J.) Amitesh/-