AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
29 paragraphs · 340 wordsHeard learned counsel for the parties.
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.
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.
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).
