Prakash Sav @ Prakash Kumar Sao vs State Of Jharkhand

Heard Mr. Tejo Mistry, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant along with Mr. Ashish Kumar, Advocate.

Heard Mr. Bhola Nath Rajak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

This appeal has been filed for the following relief:

“The instant criminal appeal is directed against the order dated 09.07.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, Children Court,

Giridih, in Children Case No.08 of 2019, corresponding to M.C.A No.719 of 2019, arising out of Dumri P.S. Case No.63 of 2017,

registered under Section 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 504 of Indian Penal Code, later on Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was

added, whereby prayer for regular bail of the children appellant has been rejected, now the case is pending in the court of learned Special

Judge, Children Court, Giridih.â€​

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Special Judge Children Court, Giridih, has rejected the bail application of the appellant by

holding that the appellant and another person was normal in physical as well as mental condition at the time of occurrence and he was mentally

matured enough to understand the nature of the offence and capable of understanding the consequences of the offence. He further submits that

charge has already been framed by the learned court on 12.06.2019. While considering the merits of the case, the learned court below has referred to

various paragraphs of the case diary and has observed that the injured had expired on 14.08.2017. The learned counsel submits that similarly situated

persons namely Jagarnath Sao and Prasad Sao, Ghanshyam Sao, Mahadeo Sao and Umesh Sao, have been enlarged on anticipatory/regular bail in

A.B.A. No.2661 of 2018, B.A. No.7629 of 2019, B.A. No.93 of 2018 and B.A. No.255 of 2018 respectively. The learned counsel submits that the

case of the appellant is on better footing, in as much as, there is no specific allegation made against the appellant in the F.I.R.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State as well as Informant while opposing the prayer of the appellant do not dispute the fact that

similarly situated persons have been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court and some of them have also been enlarged on anticipatory bail.

After hearing the counsel for the parties and after considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also the fact that no overt act has been

alleged in the F.I.R so far as the appellant is concerned and that similarly situated other co-accused, who have been named in the F.I.R have been

enlarged on bail/anticipatory bail by this Court as submitted by the counsel for the appellant and also considering the custody of the appellant, this

Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 09.07.2019, rejecting the prayer for bail of the appellant. This Court directs that the appellant be

enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Learned

Special Judge, Children Court, Giridih in connection with Children Case No.08 of 2019, corresponding to M.C.A. No.719 of 2019, arising out of Dumri

P.S. Case No.63 of 2017, on the following conditions:

(i) The appellant will fully cooperate with the proceedings before the learned court below.

(ii) The appellant shall appear before the learned court below on each and every date and on account of even single default, his bail bond will be

cancelled by the learned court below.

(iii) One of the bailors should be close family member of the appellant.

The instant appeal is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.