Harsh Singh son Of Late Sanjay Singh vs State Of Jharkhand

Heard, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. R. S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Prashant Roy, Advocate and learned counsel for the State, Mr. Shekhar Sinha, Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the informant, Mr. P. P. N. Roy, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Soumitra Baroi, Advocate.

The petitioner has prayed for grant of regular bail in connection with Saraidhela P.S. Case No.20 of 2017, corresponding to G. R. Case No.404 of 2017, for the offence registered under sections 302,307,120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of Arms Act against unknown accused person on the basis of written report submitted by Raja Yadav.

Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that informant has not taken name of the petitioner nor any witnesses examined during investigation under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has claimed to be eye witness to the occurrence. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that one Nand Kumar Singh has been arrested by Ara(Bihar) Police on 02.08.2018 and he confessed his guilt in said case of Bihar including the commission of the present case on 02.08.2018 though at that time the investigating officer of the present case i.e. Saraidhela P.S. Case No.20 of 2017 was also present and on the basis of the said confession he was remanded in the present case though Nand Kumar Singh has not taken name of the petitioner in his first confessional statement recorded in connection with Ara (Bihar) P.S. Case. The co-accused Nand Kumar Singh was brought to the Dhanbad on 11.08.2018 where he gave another confession before the Investigating Officer in the present case. In this second confession he has disclosed the name of the petitioner, Harsh Singh as the co-accused, who has supplied the arms. After giving such confessional statement under coercion and duress by the prosecution, the Nand Kumar Singh filed an application before the Court from Jail custody on 13.08.2018, retracted from alleged confession, which was taken on duress as such, there is no legal materials so far involvement of the petitioner is concerned. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that no fire arm was recovered so as to connect the complicity of the petitioner with the alleged occurrence. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the Dhanbad police has submitted criminal antecedent report of the petitioner received from the office of The Director General of Police, Jharkhand, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. From the said report, which has been brought on record as counter affidavit, there is no criminal antecedent of the petitioner. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the impugned order referred some of the paragraphs of the case diary, which have nothing to do with the present case. The material, which has been collected by the investigating officer only shows that the petitioner has some talk on mobile phone with co-accused Nand Kumar Singh prior to the occurrence and once on the date of occurrence and after the occurrence the mobile phone of co-accused Nand Kumar Singh was found switched off after 16.59 hours. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that under such evidence the petitioner has been taken into custody on 30.11.2018 though there is no legal material against the petitioner as such, petitioner may be enlarged on regular bail.

Learned counsel for the State, Mr. Shekhar Sinha, Public Prosecutor and learned Senior counsel for the informant, Mr. P. P. N. Roy, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Soumitra Baroi, Advocate have submitted that it is a case of strong circumstantial evidence against the petitioner since the petitioner is relative of one of the family with whom the deceased has animosity and he was found in connection with the co-accused Nand Kumar Singh, who has confessed his guilt before the Ara(Bihar) Police and pursuant thereto this petitioner has also confessed his guilt before the Dhanbad Police. Learned Senior counsel for the informant has submitted that the mobile phone of Nand Kumar Singh has connection with the mobile phone of the petitioner and Nand Kumar Singh has confessed his guilt as such, there is a strong circumstance though he has no criminal antecedent but he was involved in brutal murder of the deceased in broad day light and as such, his prayer for bail may be rejected directing the court below to the expedite the trial. Learned Senior counsel for the informant has further submitted that prior to the occurrence this petitioner had talk with co-accused Nand Kumar Singh @ Mama on mobile phone as such, there is a strong circumstance against him as such, the petitioner may not be enlarged on regular bail.

Heard, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. R. S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Prashant Roy and learned counsel for the State, Mr. Shekhar Sinha, Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the informant, Mr. P. P. N. Roy, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Soumitra Baroi, Advocate and considered the materials brought on record. From perusal of the same, it appears that the F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown person, the material which has been collected by the investigating officer of the case is the confessional statement of the co-accused recorded at Ara in which the name of the petitioner has not been disclosed but on remand taken in this case Nand Kumar Singh again confessed his guilt on 11.08.2018, where Nand Kumar Singh has disclosed the involvement of the petitioner Harsh Singh as a supplier of arms. No fire arms has been recovered pursuant to the disclosure made by co-accused, Nand Kumar Singh. It appears that the only legal material, which has been collected by the investigating officer is that this petitioner Harsh Singh has telephonic/ mobile talk with Nand Kumar Singh @ Mama on the alleged date of occurrence at 14.59 hours and thereafter the mobile phone of the Nand Kumar Singh has been found to be switched off. No criminal antecedent report has been found either from the State of Jharkhand or Bihar or Uttar Pradesh. No material has been collected by the investigating officer to show that there was any talk with regard to commission of the offence. On the basis of such sketchy evidence, the petitioner cannot be denied the privilege of bail, who is in custody since 30.11.2018. Accordingly, prayer for bail is hereby allowed. The petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in connection with Saraidhela P.S. Case No.20 of 2017, corresponding to G. R. Case No.404 of 2017 with condition that one of the bailor must be close relative having the property in Dhanbad. The petitioner shall appear before the learned trial Court each and every date till framing of the charge.