BINOD RAM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been preferred under Sections 439 and 440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with the offence registered with Barwadih P.S. Case No. 36 of 2004, corresponding to G.R. No. 186(A) of 2004 (S.T. No. 86 of 2009), for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 353 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 25(1b) a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act, Section 17 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 3/5 of the Explosive Substance Act, pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge at Latehar.

(2.) Having heard learned Counsel for both the sides and looking to the evidences on record, it appears that there is, prima facie, a case against the present applicant. Previously also on three different occasions, bail applications bearing B.A. No. 953 of 2009, B.A. No. 2666 of 2010 and B.A. No. 9053 of 2010, preferred by the present applicant, have been dismissed on merits vide order dated 17th April, 2009, 23rd April, 2010 and 21st January, 2011 respectively. Paragraph 3 of the order passed by this Court in B.A. No. 953 of 2009, on 17th April, 2009 reads as under:

(3.) Looking to the evidence collected during the course of investigation and looking to the involvement of the present applicant in the offence as alleged by the prosecution and also looking to the recovery of sizeable number of fire arms and cartridge and also looking to the fact that there are more than half a dozen antecedents of the present applicant and it also appears that the Petitioner was absconding from the date of offence i.e. in April, 2004 and he was remanded on 19th June, 2008 i.e. after four years. The Petitioner was not traceable, though he was named in the F.I.R. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the present applicant on bail otherwise he will not be available at the time of trial or he may tamper with evidence.