Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 478 (JHR)

Daymanti Devi v. State Of Jharkhand

2017-03-06

ANANDA SEN, PRADIP KUMAR MOHANTY

body2017
JUDGMENT I.A. No. 4274 of 2016 & I.A. No.7245 of 2016 The instant I.A. Nos. 4274 of 2016 & 7245 of 2016 have been filed praying therein to release the appellants on bail during the pendency of the appeal after suspending the sentence. 2. Heard Mr. S.K. Murtty, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned Addl. P.P. for the State. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that they are in custody for more than five years and there is no direct material against the appellants, therefore they may be released on bail. 4. Learned Addl. P.P. vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the appellants on the ground that there are six eye witnesses of the occurrence including the widow of the deceased (P.W.7). P.W.7 has specifically stated about the role played by the appellant no.2, Bital Kolh regarding the assault made on the head of the deceased by means of stone and all the witnesses have also corroborated the evidence of P.W.7. Doctor (P.W.1), who conducted the autopsy, has also corroborated the oral testimony of the witnesses, therefore, it is not a fit case to release the appellants on bail. 5. Having heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the lower court records and after considering the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 and Postmortem Report (Exhibit-1) and the period of custody, we direct the trial court (learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-V, Giridih) to admit the appellant nos. 1, 3 and 4, namely, Daymanti Devi, Badku Kolh and Chhotu Kolh @ Chhotaku Kolh, respectively, on bail after suspending the sentence imposed against them, on such terms and conditions, as he may deem fit and proper, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 18 of 2012, subject to the condition that the appellant nos. 1, 3 and 4 shall deposit a sum of Rs. 1, 3 and 4 shall deposit a sum of Rs. 25000/- (Twenty thousand only) each, in the name of the widow of the deceased (P.W.7), in the shape of Cash Certificate/Fixed Deposit of a Nationalized Bank for a period of 10 years subject to its renewal, and a certificate to that effect shall be furnished before the trial Court, and the trial court shall intimate the Bank not to encash or pledge the same in favour of the widow of the deceased (P.W.7) within a period of 10 years without the leave of the Court, with a further condition that the bank shall release quarterly interest to the widow of the deceased. 6. So far as appellant no.2, namely, Bital Kolh is concerned after considering the evidence of P.W. 7, who has specifically stated that the appellant no.2 has assaulted the deceased on his head by means of stone, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the appellant no.2, Bital Kolh at this stage. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the appellant no.2 is hereby rejected. 7. I.A. No.4274 of 2016 & I.A. No.7245 of 2016 stands disposed of.