Jharkhand High Court
Hemlal Mahto Alias Guruji vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 January, 2017
Author: Rajesh Shankar
Bench: Rajesh Shankar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B. A. No.6994 of 2016
-----
Hemlal Mahto @ Guruji. .......... Petitioner.
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand. .......... Opposite Party.
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. A. K. Sahani, Advocate
For the State : A.P.P.
------
07/03.01.2017: Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is an accused in a case registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 427, 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code; Section 27 of the Arms Act; Section 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act; Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act; and Section 13 of the UAP Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the petitioner's prayer for bail was rejected twice by this Court, firstly vide order dated 23rd February, 2015 in B.A. No.5653 of 2014 and secondly vide order dated 21st August, 2015 in B.A. No.5678 of 2015. By way of present bail application, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 20th December, 2013 and, therefore, his bail application may be considered sympathetically.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the petitioner's prayer for bail.
Earlier status report regarding stage of trail was called for, which has now been received. On perusal of the report of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Giridih dated 24th November, 2014, it appears that three witnesses have been examined in this case and five more witnesses are yet to be examined. From the said report, it also appears that the material witnesses in this case are yet to be examined for which proper steps are being taken for ensuring their attendance.
Considering the fact that the trial of this case is continuing and the material witnesses are yet to be examined, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner, above -2- named, on bail in connection with Sessions Trial No.107 of 2013, arising out of Giridih (M) P.S. Case No.180 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No.1744 of 2012.
Accordingly, petitioner's prayer for bail stands rejected. However, the Trial Court shall make due endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible by ensuring the presence of remaining witnesses.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.) Sanjay/