Bipin Kumar Singh vs The State of Jharkhand

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner is an accused in a case registered under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 67 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 269 of 2016, pending in the court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa.

The 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. The petitioner has not been named in the F.I.R. His name has surfaced on the alleged confessional statement of co-accused Manjura Bodra @ Ramesh Bodra @ Negro. Except the said confessional statement, the police has not collected any admissible evidence to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 15.07.2016 and, therefore, he may be given the privilege of regular bail.

The learned A.P.P. while opposing the petitioner''s prayer for bail submits that the name of the petitioner has surfaced on the confessional statement of co-accused Manjura Bodra @ Ramesh Bodra @ Negro as the main assailant. Moreover, the C.D.R. details of the mobile phones of co-accused Manjura Bodra @ Ramesh Bodra @ Negro, the petitioner and the deceased disclosed that on the date of occurrence, all the three persons had repeated talks with each other. The tower location of the petitioner''s mobile phone at the time of occurrence was also found to be near the place of occurrence. In that view of the matter, the petitioner may not be given the privilege of regular bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, hence, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby dismissed.