MANNU RAJWAR Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT application has been preferred under Sections 439 and 440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with the offence registered with Sadar Police Station bearing P.S. Case No. 1218 of 2008, corresponding to G.R. No. 4473 of 2008 (S.T. No. 197 of 2009), for the offences punishable under Sections 399/402/353/307/414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the Court of learned Additional District Judge, F.T.C.II, Hazaribagh.

(2.) HAVING heard learned counsels for both sides and looking to the evidences collected during the course of investigation, it appears that there is prima facie a case against the present petitioner. Previously, twice bail applications were preferred and on both occasions, bail applications preferred by the petitioner were dismissed by detailed speaking order. Initially preferred bail application being B.A. No. 3449 of 2009 was dismissed on 3rd July, 2009 and another bail application being B.A. No. 7542 of 2009 was dismissed on 19th December, 2009, thereafter, there is no change in the circumstances. Paragraph 3 of the decision given in B.A. No. 3449 of 2009 dated 3rd July, 2009 reads as under: Having heard learned counsels for both the sides and looking to the evidences collected during the course of investigation, it appears that there is prima facie a case against the present petitioner. It also appears from evidence collected during course of investigation that upon definite information, police raided the premises from where the accused persons were found out and the present petitioner was one of them. He was caught red -handed by the police. When the police approached them, they opened firing upon the police personnel's from their firearms. Police arrested this petitioner on the spot with firearms, as per evidence. It also appears that the present petitioner was having a country made pistol which was loaded one with two live cartridges. In these sets of circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the present petitioner on bail.

(3.) IN view of these evidences collected during the course of investigation and looking to the gravity of offence, quantum of punishment and the manner in which the present petitioner is involved in the offences, as alleged by the prosecution, I am not inclined to enlarge the present petitioner on bail. There is no substance in this bail application and, hence, the same is, hereby, dismissed.