SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

ABRAR AHMAD ALIAS PINTU – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND – Respondent
B.A. 8152/2021



Advocates:
['MD FAIYAJ ALAM', '', 'SIDHARTH SUDHANSHU', 'PRADEEP KUMAR', 'ASHOK SINGH']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 8152 of 2021

------

Abrar Ahmad @ Pintu … Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand Opposite Party

------

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

For the Petitioner

: None

For the State

: None

------

Order No.02 Dated- 30.07.2021

The matter is taken up through video conferencing.

No one turns up on behalf of the parties.

The petitioner is directed to remove the defects as pointed out

by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period

is over.

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in

connection with Sessions Trial No.49 of 2020 arising out of Bokaro

Thermal P.S. Case No.51 of 2019 (G.R. No.383 of 2019) registered

under sections 302/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Perusal of the record reveals that earlier the prayer for regular

bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated

14.12.2020 in B.A. No.9678 of 2020 and by the said order, the trial

court was directed to conclude the trial within six months from the

date of receipt of the said rejection order by the trial court.

Perusal of the record further reveals that it has been averred in

the bail application that the charge sheet witness have been examined

and the petitioner has annexed the copy of the depositions of the

witnesses as Annexure-3 series wherein the father of the deceased has

been examined as P.W.1 who has been declared hostile as he did not

support the case of the prosecution and the eye-witness and injured

in the occurrence being the P.W.2-Md. Tufail Ahmad has also not

supported the case of the prosecution and has been declared hostile.

P.W.3- Manish @ Ravindra Yadav and P.W.4- Suresh Kumar Yadav

have also not supported the case of the prosecution and have been

declared hostile. It is next averred in the bail application that the

petitioner has been in custody since 24.04.2019 and the petitioner is

ready to abide by any terms and condition as imposed upon him by

this Court.

Considering the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to enlarge the

above named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is

directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-

(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

each to the satisfaction of learned A.S.J.-IV, Bermo at Tenughat, in

connection with Sessions Trial No.49 of 2020 arising out of Bokaro

Thermal P.S. Case No.51 of 2019 (G.R. No.383 of 2019).

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)

Sonu-Gunjan/

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top