JITAN SOREN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 03/14.05.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State as well as the learned counsel for the informant. Petitioners are apprehending their arrest for the offence registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 458 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Amrapara P.S. Case No. 75 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. No. 711 of 2011, pending in the Court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pakur.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are not named in the F.I.R. Their name has come only on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Ranjan Marandi and Munshi Marandi and amongst them the said Ranjan Marandi has already been granted regular bail by another Bench of this Court in B.A. No. 9575 of 2011 vide order dated 06.01.2012. LEARNED counsel for the informant has submitted that this is a case of brutal murder of Sister Walsa. A number of persons came to house of the informant. Some of them surrounded the house and thereafter, some of them went inside the house of the informant where Sister Walsa was sleeping and killed her brutally. He has further pointed out that in the supervision note, it has come that there are sufficient materials against the present petitioners for filing charge sheet. He has further pointed out that a number of independent witnesses have also stated about the petitioners regarding their involvement in the commission of offence. Considering the fact that there is sufficient materials against the petitioners and also considering the statement of the eye witnesses regarding the involvement of the petitioners in this brutal murder of Sister Walsa, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.