Jharkhand High Court
Ramesh Ram @ Rames Mochi vs State Of Jharkhand on 24 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
[CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION]
B.A. No. 6480 of 2021
Ramesh Ram @ Rames Mochi ...... Petitioner
Versus
State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
(Through : Video Conference)
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P.
-----
02/Dated: 24/07/2021:
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though there are some
defect(s) in the bail application as pointed out vide stamp reporter, but he
undertakes to remove the defects within 30 days after the physical court starts
and prayed that bail application may be heard as it is a regular bail application
of the petitioner, who is in custody.
Considering the same, this Court is inclined to hear the bail application on
merits but with condition that petitioner shall remove the defects within 30
days after the physical court starts.
Joint Registrar (Judicial) is directed to ensure the compliance of this order.
Heard, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh and
learned counsel for the State, Mrs. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has prayed
for grant of regular bail in connection with Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case
No.83 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. No.909 of 2010, for the offence
registered under Sections 364(A)/34 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that FIR has been
lodged against two unknown accused persons and the name of this petitioner
has been transpired on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-
accused, namely, Anil Kumar Singh Rekha Devi @ Gudia and Bandhu Mochi.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that petitioner has
no criminal antecedent except one case in which he has been falsely implicated
and he has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order
dated 05.07.2021 passed in B.A. No.5408 of 2021.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that petitioner is in
custody since 15.02.2021 though the other accused persons have been acquitted
by the learned trial court vide judgment dated 19.08.2017 passed in S.T.
No.166 of 2011.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted
that petitioner has criminal antecedent and he has remained absconder for a
long time, as such, the benefit of judgment of acquittal cannot be given to this
petitioner.
Considering the rival submissions of the parties, learned counsel for the
State is directed to file a detail counter-affidavit with regard to material
collected during the investigation, criminal antecedent report of the petitioner
and also a report with respect to prosecution lodged by the State as the accused
remained absconder.
It is made clear that, if no such prosecution has been lodged by the State
they why the proceeding shall not be initiated against the police officer.
Put up this case after four weeks.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
Sandeep/R.S
