Jharkhand High Court
Rohit Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. ... on 13 April, 2022
Author: Subhash Chand
Bench: Subhash Chand
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1946 of 2022
Rohit Kumar ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Niraj Kishore, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Saket Kumar, A.P.P
3/13.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP
for the State.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Garhwa P.S. Case No. 622/2021 under section 25(1-b)(a), 26, 35 of the Arms Act pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that FIR of this case was lodged by the police officer against 3 named accused persons including the applicant with these allegations that the informant officer in charge of the police station had received secret information that three miscreants on bike were roaming to commit the crime. Accordingly the raid was conducted and the motorcycle was intercepted by the police team, two persons apprehended at the spot who were identified as Akash Kumar and Rohit Kumar. The third one managed to escape who was identified as Sanjeev Kumar and from the possession of the applicant one country made loaded pistol and one mobile was recovered.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The alleged recovery has been planted. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 01.12.2021 having no criminal antecedents.
Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that one country made pistol and one mobile was recovered from the possession of the applicant who was apprehended at the spot.
In view of the submissions made and the materials on record, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.) tarun IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1272 of 2022 Maj Khan @ Maaz Khan @ Ahtram Hussain ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. H.K. Shikarwar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Mohua Palit, A.P.P
3/12.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned
APP for the State.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Lohsinghna P.S. Case No.139 of 2021 under sections 366/34 the IPC, pending in the court of learned ACJM, Hazaribag..
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that FIR of this case was lodged by the mother of the victim against three named accused persons including the applicant and one unknown person with these allegations that the minor daughter of the informant 16 years old was walking in front of the house and she did not come back to her house. On search it was found that Maj Khan @ Maaz Khan @ Ahtram Hussain had abducted her daughter and taken her by car. Earlier also he had teased her daughter. The sister of Maj Khan @ Maaz Khan @ Ahtram Hussain had also assisted him in abducting the daughter of the informant.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the victim had love affairs with the applicant. The victim willingly accompanied him. The victim was recovered and her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C was recorded which revealed that victim was also consenting party. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 17.11.2021.
Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that the victim was 16 years old minor and her consent has no bearing.
In view of the submissions made and the materials on record, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.) tarun IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2654 of 2022 Arun Kumar Choudhary ... ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. V.N. Jha, A.P.P. 3/12.04.2022 List this case for hearing on 18.04.2022.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.) tarun IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1272 of 2022 Akhilesh Yadav @ Butan Manghi @ Gautam Jee ... ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. D.K. Chakraverty, Advocate For the State : None 4/12.04.2022 Learned APP Mrs. Priya Shrestha holding the brief of Snehlika Bhagat has submitted that she has some medical emergency. Accordingly one weeks' time is granted.
List this case for hearing on 19.04.2022.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.)
tarun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1593 of 2022
Bhola Gosai ... ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Md. Naimuddin Ansari, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.PP 4/12.04.2022 Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the office within one week.
List this case for hearing on 19.04.2022.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.)
tarun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 214 of 2022
Shanika Toppno ...... ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr.K.S. Nanda, Advocate For the State : Mr. V. Pradhan, A.P.P. 3/12.04.2022
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.
This bail application has been filed on behalf of the above named applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Kamdara P.S. Case No.45/2021 under section 385, 34 of IPC under section 25(1- B)(a), 25 (6) 26 35 of the Arms Act and section 17 of CLA Act, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gumla.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged against two named accused persons including the applicant with these allegations that the police had got the secret information that the banned extremists organization PLFI and its members Shanika Toppno along with his friends were to commit offence. Accordingly raid was conducted and two persons were apprehended at the spot who were identified as Shanika Toppno alias Bhalu and Rama Shankar Yadav and from their possession a looted country made pistol was recovered along with two live cartridges and it was told by them that they were working for recovery of levy at the behest of the Area Commander Mandu Toppno alias Sahay Toppno.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that though the applicant was apprehended at the spot but alleged recovery of country made pistol and live cartridges have been planted. Similarly situated co- accused Rama Shankar Yadav has been granted bail in B.A.No.15688/2021 vide order dated 03.02.2022 by the co-ordinate bench of this court. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 30.09.2021.
Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000 /- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.) tarun IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1256 of 2022 Chhotu Ganjhu @ Rajesh Ganjhu @ Bipul ...... ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. P.K. Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, A.P.P. 3/12.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State. This bail application has been filed on behalf of the above named applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Charhi P.S. Case No.90/2021 under section 25(1-b)a/26/35 of the Arms Act, and section 17 of the CLA Act, pending in the court of learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged by the informant police officer against three named accused persons including the applicant with these allegations that on 17.09.2021 the informant along with the police party were patrolling and they saw that three persons after seeing the police were trying to flee away. One of the person was apprehended at the spot and on being searched, nine live cartridges were recovered from his possession and on interrogation it was told by him that he along with Sikendra Munda and Suraj Munda, were involved in recovery of levy and they also went to the house of Ram Kishore Munda.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that though the applicant was apprehended at the spot, yet nothing incriminating article was recovered from his possession. The alleged recovery of cartridges have been planted. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 18.09.2021.
Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that the applicant belonged to Naxalite group and nine live cartridges was recovered from the possession of the applicant.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.15,000 /- (Rupees fifteen thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.)
tarun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. xxxx of xxxxx
xxxxxx ...... ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. xxxx, Advocate For the State : Mr. xxxx, A.P.P. xxx/11.04.2022
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with xxxxx P.S. Case No.xxxx/xxxx under section xxxxxx of the IPC and section 4 of the POCSO Act, pending in the court of learned xxxxxxxx Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged by the brother of the victim with the allegations that on 21.08.21 at 8 O' clock in evening his sister had gone to wash her hands to the government hand pump in front of her house. Chhotu Kumar @ Sanjit Kumar Paswan @ Chhotu Paswan forcibly took her with him by the motorcycle and he also established physical relation with his minor sister and also wrongfully confined her. On 25.08.2021 he brought his sister from the house of the accused.
Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Though the victim has supported the prosecution story in her statement under section 164 of Cr.P.C. yet the same is not corroborated by the medical evidence and the statement of the informant also is not corroborated with the statement of independent witnesses. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 07.10.2021.
Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that the victim was 12 years old and she was forcibly taken by the applicant on 21.08.2021 and she was recovered from the house of the applicant by the informant. The statement of the victim U/s 164 of Cr.P.C. was recorded in which the victim had stated that she was forcibly taken by the applicant-accused and was also criminally intimidated. She was raped by the accused, Chhotu Kumar @ Sanjit Kumar Paswan @ Chhotu Paswan and she was also wrongfully confined at several places and his brother brought her to her house. The statement of the informant was also recorded U/s 161 Cr.P.C. wherein he had also corroborated the prosecution story. So far the medical evidence is concerned the same was conducted on 30.08.2021 just after 9 days of the occurrence and from this medical examination report the doctor had stated that no vaginal swab could be taken because it was too late to examine the victim. The doctor had not given any opinion in regard to the condition of hymen.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail application of the applicant is, hereby, rejected.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.)
tarun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. xxxxxx of xxxxx
xxxxxx ...... ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND For the Petitioner : Mr. xxxx, Advocate For the State : Mr. xxxxx, A.P.P. xxx/11.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Manika P.S. Case No.93/2021 under section 304B/34 of IPC pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Latehar.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged by the father of the deceased with these allegations that his daughter was married with Umesh Yadav @ Umesh Kumar Yadav on 30.04.2018. She was subjected to cruelty for demand of dowry by her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law and the sister- in-law whenever visited her house, also subjected her to cruelty for demand of dowry. He got the information from a person on his mobile phone that his daughter was ill and admitted in hospital. He reached there and found his daughter dead. Her dead body was lying in the court-yard of the house.
Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The allegations made in the FIR are bald, general and omnibus. There is no cogent evidence against the applicant in regard to demand of dowry and subjecting her to cruelty. As per post-mortem report the cause of death was hanging. The victim herself committed suicide. The applicant being the husband also made effort to save her life and took her to the hospital where she ultimately died. The cause of committing suicide by the victim was that she was having extra marital relation with one Upendra Yadav. She used to talk on mobile phone and the same was opposed by the members of in-laws house for the same reason she committed suicide. This fact is also corroborated with the statement of the independent witnesses of the same village Vijay Bhuiya, Nagina Bhuiya and Jageshwar Yadav. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 24.12.2021.
Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that the unnatural death of the daughter of the informant was caused in her matrimonial house within 7 years of marriage and there is evidence that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty. The witnesses of the parental house of the deceased had corroborated the prosecution story.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail application of the applicant is, hereby, allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.)
tarun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. xxxx of xxxx
xxxxxx ...... ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. xxxxx, Advocate For the State : Mr. xxxx, A.P.P. xxx/11.04.2022
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with xxxx P.S. Case No.xxx/xxxx under section xxxx of the IPC and section 25(1-AA), 26 , 35 of the Arms Act and section 17(i)(ii) of CLA Act pending in the court of learned xxxxxxx Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged by the police officer against three named accused persons including the applicant and unknown persons with these allegations that the informant had received secret information that Shravan Uraon @ Hemant the Area Commander Akraman Jee TPC Group was coming from the side of Gosaidih and accordingly he reached there and Bolero car was intercepted. The person boarded on it was identified as Shravan Uraon @ Hemant the Area Commander Akraman Jee TPC Group and he told that he was going to receive arms from Shravan Kumar Singh. The informant reached to village Kalmi and one person who was to flee away was apprehended was Shravan Kumar Singh and one A.K.-47 Rifle and 20 live cartridges of 7.62 mm in its magazine was recovered from him.
Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not registered his name as membership of banned extremists organization. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 26.10.2021.
Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that A.K.- 47 Rifle along with live cartridges were recovered from the possession of the applicant.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail application of the applicant is, hereby, allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.)
tarun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. xxxxx of xxxxxx
xxxxx ...... ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. xxxx, Advocate For the State : Mrs. xxxx, A.P.P. For the Informant Mr. xxxx, Advocate 3xxxx/11.04.2022
Learned counsel on behalf of the informant prays to file counter affidavit in view of the direction passed in provisional bail order dated 09.03.2022. Accordingly, two weeks' time is allowed.
List this case for hearing on 22.04.2022.
In the meantime the provisional bail dated 09.03.2022 is extended till the next date.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.)
tarun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. xxx of xxxxx
1. xxxx ...... ..... Petitioners Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
With
B.A. No. xxxx of xxxxx
xxxx ...... ..... Petitioner Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. xxxx, Advocate For the State : Mr. xxxx Spl.P.P. xxx/11.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Spl.PP for the State.
B.A.No.613/2022 is on behalf of Anil Ganjhu @ Sarju Ganjhu @ Saryu Ganjhu, Deepak Ganjhu @ Deepak Kumar Ganjhu and B.A. No. 1350 of 2022 is on behalf of Jhaksa Lohar @ Dwarika Vishwakarma with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No.01/2020 under section 18, 20 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and section 33 of the Indian Forest Act pending in the court of learned Principal Session Judge-cum- Special Judge (NDPS), Chatra.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that FIR of this case was lodged by the police officer against 14 named accused persons including the applicants and five to six unknown persons with these allegations that the police officer had received secret information that some persons of village were involved in cultivation of opium on the forest land. Accordingly, in collaboration of the forest officers raid was conducted by the police party and standing crop of poppy plants was destroyed by the JCB machines after having taken two of the plants in custody for sampling and on verification all 14 named villagers were figured in the FIR along with 5 to 6 unknown persons.
Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. Their name figured in the FIR on account of village rivalry. Nothing incriminating article was recovered from the possession of the applicants and the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 in B.A.No.613/2022 have been languishing in jail since 03.01.2022 and applicant in B.A.No.1350/2022 has been languishing in jail since 10.01.2022.
Learned Spl.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicants and contended that poppy plants which was taken for sampling, the same was confirmed by the SFSL report that the cultivation of opium was being carried on by the accused persons. The applicant namely Anil Ganjhu @ Sarju Ganjhu @ Saryu Ganjhu is having one more criminal antecedents except this present case.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail applications of the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 (B.A.No.613/2022) and applicant in (B.A. No. 1350/2022) are hereby allowed. Let the applicants be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000 /- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.)
tarun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. xxxx of xxxxxx
xxxxxx ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr.xxxxx. Advocate For the State : Mr. xxxx, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. xxxxx, Adv. xxx/11.04.2022
Heard learned senior counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with xxxx P.S. Case No.xxx/xxxx under Section 306 of the IPC, pending in the court of learned xxxxxxxxx.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that FIR of this case was lodged by the father of the deceased with these allegations that on reaching to his house he saw the dead body of his son hanging inside the house and a suicidal note was also found from the pocket of his son in which the name of the accused was mentioned in regard to abetting to commit suicide and accordingly the FIR was lodged against the applicant and unknown.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that as per suicidal note Nagendra Kumar Singh and his family members are made responsible to commit suicide. But there is nothing on record to establish in regard to abetting the son of the informant to commit suicide. The only land dispute had been mentioned in the suicidal note and for the same reason torturing the son of the informant is also mentioned. It is further submitted that there is no expert opinion whether the suicidal note was in the handwriting of the deceased son of the informant or not. Similarly situated co-accused Golu Singh @ Golu Kumar Singh has been granted bail in B.A. No.13720/2021 vide order dated 15.12.2021 by this Court. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 23.12.2021.
Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that suicidal note was recovered from the pocket of the deceased son of the informant in which it is alleged that on account of land dispute he and his family members were tortured by Nagendra Kumar Singh and being aggrieved from the same he committed suicide and the SFSL report in regard to handwriting of the deceased is being awaited.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, there being no evidence in regard to the abetment by the accused to commit suicide of the son of the informant, the bail application of the applicant is, hereby, allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.xxxx,xxx/- (Rupees xxxxxx thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.) tarun IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2494 of 2022 Ram Pyari Rai @ Ram Pyerai Rai ...... ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. R.K. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.K. Shukla, A.P.P. 3/08.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Basantrai P.S. Case No.27/2020 under section 376D, 376(2)(1) and 504 of IPC, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Godda.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged by the informant in regard to gang rape upon his lunatic wife committed by the accused Ram Pyari Rai @ Ram Pyerai Rai and Vikash Rajak.
Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged by the husband of the victim and no statement of the victim under section 161 or 164 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. Even no medical examination was conducted of the victim and similarly situated co-accused Vikash Rajak has been granted bail in B.A.No.11026/2020 vide order dated 14.01.2021 by the co-ordinate bench of this court. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 18.10.2021.
Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that as per FIR allegations the victim was lunatic and mentally retarded and this FIR was lodged by her husband in regard to committing gang rape by accused Ram Pyari Rai @ Ram Pyerai Rai and Vikash Rajak. The testimony of the informant is also corroborated with the statement of the independent witnesses in view of paras-8,9,10 and 11 of the case wherein the witnesses Kuldeo Das, Vijay Kumar Saw, Naresh Roy and Srikant Roy have categorically stated that they heard the screamings and reached the place of occurrence. The accused persons flee away from the place of occurrence and the wife of informant was found in naked condition. The testimony of all the independent witnesses is admissible under Section 6 of Evidence Act as res gastae evidence. It is further submitted that a village panchyati was also held and same matter was placed as such, a prima-facie case is made out against the applicant. The statements of the victim under section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C was not recorded by the I.O. as the victim was lunatic.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail application of the applicant is, hereby, rejected.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.) tarun IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2626 of 2022 Praveen Sahu @ Praveen Kumar ...... ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashish Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.K. Jha, A.P.P. 2/08.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Gumla P.S. Case No.250/2021 under section 302/34 of IPC pending in the court of learned xxxx.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged against 11 named accused persons including the applicant and unknown persons of the extremists organization with these allegations that posters of extremists organisation TSPC were found at several places and these members of the extremists banned organization were involved in collecting extortion money from the businessman and coal transporters etc. by using these posters as demand. The several pamphlets and other incriminating articles were recovered.
Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that though the name of the applicant is also figured in FIR but nothing incriminating article was recovered from the possession of the applicant. The applicant did not belong to banned extremists organisation. Similarly situated co-accused Pankaj Kumar Saw, Amlesh Kumar Das, Dilchand Ganjhu @ Sukul Ganjhu and Mukesh Ganjhu @ Muneshwar Ganjhu have been granted bail in B.A.Nos. 6728/2019, 667/2020, 4554/2020, 16010/2021 vide order dated 06.08.2019, 28.01.2020, 25.09.2020 and 08.02.2022 respectively by co-ordinate bench of this court. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 22.12.2021.
Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail application of the applicant is, hereby, allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.)
tarun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 2175 of 2022
Naresh Mahto ...... ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.K. Dubey, A.P.P. 3/07.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Rajrappa P.S. Case No.132/2021 under section 376/506 of the IPC pending in the court of learned A.D.J-1, Ramgarh.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged by the victim herself against Naresh Mahto with these allegations on 07.10.21 at 9 O' clock of the day time she was working alone at the agricultural field and the accused Naresh Mahto came there and he committed rape upon her. On being alarmed by her brother-in-law Manoj Mahto, nephew Ruplal Mahto and Sandeep Mahto came there and the accused Naresh Mahto fled away.
Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that as per the FIR allegations the occurrence is of 07.010.2021 and this FIR was lodged on 12.10.2021, five days belated, while not only the informant her close relative Manoj Mahto and Sandeep Mahto had come to know in regard to the occurrence. There is no explanation of the delay in lodging the FIR. The victim was 45 years old though she supported the prosecution story in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. yet the same is not supported with the medical evidence. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 13.10.2021.
. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that the victim herself has lodged the FIR and supported the prosecution story in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail application of the applicant is, hereby, allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.) tarun IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1345 of 2022 Suraj Raj @ Sunny ...... ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, A.P.P. For the Informant :Mr. Nagmani Tiwary, Advocate 4/07.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Airport P.S. Case No.18/2021 under section 302, 120B/34 of the IPC and section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged against six named accused persons and unknown persons with these allegations that the husband of the informant had left the house on 13.04.2021 and at 6 O' clock of evening she received telephonic call that her husband had been shot and was lying in injured condition. Accordingly, she reached there and took her husband to RIMS Hospital. Her husband in injured condition had stated that the co- villager Binu Gope @ Vinod Gope alongwith Niku Gupta, Golu @ Subham had committed the offence and on reaching RIMS Hospital her husband died.
Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that the name of the applicant does not figure in the FIR and no allegations has been made in the whole FIR against the applicant. The applicant was not named in dying declaration made by the deceased husband while in injured condition. The name of the applicant transpired during investigation in the confessional statement of co-accused in which it is alleged that two mobiles which were recovered by the police one was of applicant Suraj Raj @ Sunny and another was of the shooter Krishna Kumar @ Jai Singh. There is nothing on record against the applicant to establish his complicity in commission of murder of the husband of the informant. Similarly situated co-accused Krishna Kumar @ Jai Singh has been granted bail in B.A. No. 10380/2021 vide order dated 26.10.2021 by co-ordinate bench of this court and Sudhir Kumar Choudhary has been granted bail in B.A.No. 11129/2021 vide order dated 30.11.2021 by this court. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 25.05.2021.
Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that the applicant is a sharp shooter and his name transpired on the basis of mobile phone which was being used by the applicant. He is also having criminal antecedents in three criminal cases.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail application of the applicant is, hereby, allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.) tarun IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1267 of 2022 Rajendra Kumar Singh @ Munna Singh ...... ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. P.K. Rai, Advocate For the State : Mr. N.K. Ganjhu, A.P.P. 3/07.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Tisri P.S. Case No.35/2021 under section 395/397 of the IPC and section 25(1- B)A/26/35 of the Arms Act and section 3/4 of Explosive Substance Act pending in the court of learned court of Principal Sessions Judge, Giridih.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged against 10-12 unknown miscreants in regard to loot of Rs.1 lakh and two mobile phones Realme Company and other of Samsung Company.
Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that the name of the applicant does not figure in the FIR. His name transpired during investigation in the confessional statement of co-accused. No looted property was recovered from the possession of the applicant. No TIP was conducted to identify the complicity of the applicant in commission of the alleged offence. Xxxxxxx Nothing incriminating article was recovered from the possession of the applicant and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 22.11.2021.
and no allegations has been made in the whole FIR against the applicant. The name of the applicant transpired during investigation in the confessional statement of co-accused in which it is alleged that two mobiles which were recovered by the police one was of applicant Suraj Raj @ Sunny and another was of the shooter Krishna Kumar @ Jai Singh. There is nothing on record against the applicant to establish his complicity in commission of murder of the husband of the informant. Similarly situated co-accused Krishna Kumar @ Jai Singh has been granted bail in B.A. No. 10380/2021 vide order dated 26.10.2021 by co-ordinate bench of this court and Sudhir Kumar Choudhary has been granted bail in B.A.No. 11129/2021 vide order dated 30.11.2021 by this court. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 25.05.2021.
Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that the applicant is a sharp shooter and his name transpired on the basis of mobile phone which was being used by the applicant. He is also having criminal antecedents in three criminal cases.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail application of the applicant is, hereby, allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.)
tarun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1240 of 2022
Gautam Kumar Yadav ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr.Ankit Kumar , Advocate
For the State : Mr. S.S. Kumar, A.P.P.
3/07.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for
the State.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with a prayer to release on bail in connection with Deoghar (cyber) P.S. Case No.47 of 2019 under sections 419,420,467,468,471 & 120B/34 of the IPC and Sections 66(B), 66(C) 66(D) of the Information and Technology Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum- Special Judge, Deoghar.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted the FIR of this case was lodged against 10 named accused persons including the applicant with these allegations that all the accused persons were involved in committing cybercrime. On conducting raid by the police Mukesh Kumar Yadav was apprehended and on the basis of the confessional statement of the apprehended accused the name of the applicant and co-accused were figured in the FIR.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that though his name figured in the FIR but nothing incriminating article was recovered from the possession of this applicant. The applicant has been languishing in the jail since 11.12.2021 having no fault. There is no evidence against the applicant in regard to committing cybercrime against any person.
Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.
In view of the submissions made and the material on record, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case.
(SUBHASH CHAND, J.) tarun