CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 05 JH CK 0004

Birendra Kumar Barnwal vs The State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 1 May 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajesh Shankar
CASE NUMBER
1961 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 340 words
1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

Petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged. Initially, the F.I.R. was lodged against unknown. During the investigation, the petitioner was implicated in this case due to the reason that his "Hero Honda" Motorcycle was found at a distance of about 100 yards from the place where the dead body of the deceased was recovered. It is further submitted that on perusal of paragraph no. 30 of the case diary, it would be evident that the petitioner did not have any talk either with the co-accused persons or with the deceased before the alleged occurrence. In fact, the motorcycle of the petitioner got punctured at the said place and he had gone to call the mechanic. During the said period, the alleged occurrence might have taken place. Except the fact that the motorcycle of the petitioner was found near the place of occurrence, the police has not collected any other admissible evidence against the petitioner to connect him with the alleged offence. Co-accused Sukhdev Singh Sardar has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.02.2017 in B.A. No. 9874 of 2016. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 27.07.2016, therefore, he may be given privilege of regular bail.

4.

Learned A.P.P. opposes the petitioner's prayer for bail.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-

(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella, in connection with Nimdih P.S. Case No. 30 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 563 of 2016 (S.T. No. 130 of 2016).