Birendra Singh vs State Of Jharkhand

The petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's prayer for bail was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 23.07.2019 passed in B.A. No. 5902/2019. By way of present bail application, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail primarily for the reason that similarly situated co-accused Roshan Sahu @ Roshan Kumar Sahu has already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.10.2020 passed in B.A. No. 7484/2020. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case due to village politics. Though the alleged occurrence took place on 05.01.2019, yet the F.I.R was lodged on 09.01.2019 i.e. after an inordinate delay of 4 days. So far as the witness Kalawati Devi (the mother of the informant and the deceased Gautam Singh) is concerned, she reached the place of occurrence after the alleged incident had already taken place. Moreover, her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C after about six months of the alleged occurrence. Hence, the petitioner, who is in judicial custody since 28.01.2019, may be given the privilege of regular bail.

Mr. Satish Prasad, learned A.P.P, while opposing the petitioner's prayer for bail, submits that a coordinate Bench of this Court while granting bail to co-accused Roshan Sahu @ Roshan Kumar Sahu, has duly considered the fact that as per the statement of the witness Kalawati Devi recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C, the assault on the head of the deceased was attributed to the petitioner. It has thus been revealed during the investigation that the petitioner is the main assailant leading to cause death of the deceased while he was under treatment in RIMS, Ranchi. Hence, the petitioner may not be given the privilege of regular bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I see no reason to reconsider the petitioner's prayer for bail in connection with Gumla P.S Case No. 06/2019.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected. However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same without any undue delay.