Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1915 (JHR)

Harish Kumar Pathak v. State of Jharkhand

2019-11-26

ANANT BIJAY SINGH

body2019
JUDGMENT : Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Narayanpur P.S. case no. 154 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No.876/2016, registered under section 354,341,342,323,325,307,504,506,304 and 34 of the I.P.C. 3. It appears that earlier petitioner has filed ABA No.4304 of 2018 and the this Court vide order dated 18.12.2018 dismissed the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner by passing a detailed order. 4. Now fresh anticipatory bail application being ABA No. 14 of 2019 has been filed on the ground mentioned at paragraph no.19 of the anticipatory bail application which reveals that the deceased Minhaz Ansari was continuously treated in PHC Narayanpur, Sadar Hospital Jamtara, PMCH Dhanbad and RIMS, Ranchi for Encephalitis and no treatment was ever administered for assault of physical injury, In the records of RIMS, Ranchi, deceased was diagnosed suffering from Encephalitis and cause of death has been shows as Cardio Respiratory Arrest. 5. I.A. No.3995 of 2019 dated 24.12.2019 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner in terms of the provisions as contained in section 176(1A) of the Cr.P.C which provides that an inquiry shall be held by the Judicial Magistrate or Metropolitan Magistrate as the case may be. 6. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred judgment in People's Union for Civil Liberty and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in (2014) 10 SCC-635. 7. A reply to the I.A.No.3995 of 2019 has been filed on behalf of the informant dated 18.11.2019 and the State has also filed counter affidavit dated 20.09.2019. It is submitted that the occurrence is of the year 2016 and now we are in the year 2019 and this anticipatory bail application has been filed at a belated stage and hence no direction can be given by this Court in anticipatory bail application, as the body of the deceased has become decomposed. 8. Further, W.P(Cr.) No.192 of 2017 was filed on behalf of Hazrat Ansari, who is brother of the deceased with a prayer for holding inquiry against the accused persons by an independent agency. 9. 8. Further, W.P(Cr.) No.192 of 2017 was filed on behalf of Hazrat Ansari, who is brother of the deceased with a prayer for holding inquiry against the accused persons by an independent agency. 9. Further, petitioner has filed I.A. No.592 of 2019 on 17.01.2019 with a prayer to call for the medical records of the deceased from RIMS, Ranchi, PHC Narayanpur, Sadar Hospital, Jamtara and PMCH Dhanbad and further prayer has been made for issuance of direction to the concerned I.O. for recording the statements of the doctors who had treated the deceased and to submit the same before this Hon'ble Court for proper appreciation. 10. It appears that W.P.(Cr.) No.68 of 2018 has been filed by Ajhela Bibi, who is mother of the deceased, on 06.03.2018 with a prayer for transfer all the cases being Narayanpur P.S. case no.154/2016 dated 06.10.2016, Narayan pur P.S case no.153/2016 dated 04.10.2016 pending in the court of CJM, Jamtara and Seraidhela P.S.case no.134/2016 dated 06.10.2016 pending in the court CJM, Dhanbad for investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation. The matter is still pending before this Court. 11. Let the W.P(Cr.) No.192 of 2017 and W.P.(Cr.) No.68 of 2018 be returned to the concerned section. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred paragraph-15 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents in W.P.(Cr.) No.192 of 2017 and submitted that the I.O. has recorded the evidence of ASI Raju Mohali, Madhusudan Batsa and Choukidar Mahadeo Rai, Subhash Rai, Mohan Kumar Rai and they have not supported the case of prosecution. 13. Further, in para 22 of the counter affidavit, it is categorically stated that Minhaz, the deceased brother of the petitioner in W.P.(Cr.) No.192/20178 was not beaten by Officer-in-Charge Narayanpur P.S., rather he was arrested by police on 04.10.2016 and hence, it is a case of serious nature as stated in Narayanpur P.S. case no.153/2016. 14. After going though the provisions of section 176(1A) Cr. P.C, I find that the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner in I.A. No.3995/2019 is at a belated stage, that too after submission of charge-sheet and dismissal of ABA No.4304/2018 and hence the same is not maintainable. Accordingly, I.A.No.3995 of 2019 is dismissed. 15. 14. After going though the provisions of section 176(1A) Cr. P.C, I find that the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner in I.A. No.3995/2019 is at a belated stage, that too after submission of charge-sheet and dismissal of ABA No.4304/2018 and hence the same is not maintainable. Accordingly, I.A.No.3995 of 2019 is dismissed. 15. I further find that occurrence is of the year 2016 and this is an anticipatory bail application filed in 2019 and so the prayer for calling the medical records of the deceased from the RIMS Ranchi and for recording of the statements of the doctors, who had treated the deceased are not appropriate at this stage. Accordingly, I.A. No.592 of 2019 is dismissed. 16. Considering all the aspects of the case and also considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that this Bench has passed a detailed order, while rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the present petitioner on 18.12.2018 in ABA No.4304 of 2018 and no fresh ground is made out by the petitioner in the present anticipatory bail application. Accordingly, A.B.A No.14 of 2019 is, hereby, dismissed.