CHARAN KERKETTA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

(2.) This is an application for grant of regular bail to the petitioner for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are not named in the F.I.R. After six months of the date of occurrence statement of two witnesses namely Jageshwar Mahto and Jagdish Mahto was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. And on the basis of statement of these two witnesses the petitioners have been made accused in this case. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that after six months they have been named in this case and as such, they deserve to enlarge on bail.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State submitted that they have directly named by two witnesses under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and as such, they do not deserve to enlarge on bail.