Ranjeet Hembram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5658 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2019 Thana- CHANDRAMANDI District- Jamui ====================================================== 1.

Ranjeet Hembram, Son of Puran Hembram, Resident of VillageBudhwadih, P.S.- Chandramandih, District- Jamui. 2.

Ganesh Soren, Son of Chunku Soren, Resident of Village- Budhwadih, P.S.- Chandramandih, District- Jamui.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nirmal Kumar Sinha, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 24-06-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioners in the present case are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Chandramandih P.S. Case No. 41 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 364 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and there is no material against them. It is further submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they are ready to co-operate in course of trial hence, privilege of anticipatory bail may be granted. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners referring to the statements of the witnesses coming in paragraph '9', '13' and '16' of the case diary.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5658 of 2020(4) dt.24-06-2020 2/2 Learned A.P.P. for the State submits that the witnesses had seen the deceased lastly in the company of these petitioners and one of the accomplice Chopelal Marandi while confessing his guilt has stated that these petitioners had helped him in throwing the dead body of the deceased in the ditch of Tetariya Jungle. At his instance, the dead body of the deceased was also recovered in decomposed position.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, wherein there are materials against the petitioners to indicate their involvement in the alleged offence and the dead body has been recovered on the statement of the co-accused who has also named these petitioners and the witnesses have stated that the deceased was lastly seen in the company of these petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to them. The prayer of the anticipatory bail stands rejected. In case the petitioners surrender and pray for regular bail in the court below within four weeks from today, their prayer for regular bail shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) vats/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.