TILAK MARDI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

(2.) The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in this case which has been registered for the offence committed under Sections 302 of the I.P.C. and under Section 27 of the Arms Act, in connection with Parsudih (Bagbera) P.S.Case No.150 of 2006, corresponding to G.R.No.2559 of 2006, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur.

(3.) The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and the said F.I.R. is lodged against unknown on the fardbeyan dated 06.11.2006 of Ramo Kuntia who has stated therein that her son was a student and on the previous evening he had come home with two girls and after having food, he accompanied them to their house but thereafter he never returned back to home. In the morning she heard hulla that the body of his son was lying and on such information she went and identified the body to be that of his son and also identified the motorcycle which was lying near his body as her son's motorcycle. She has further stated that her son was in love with a girl of Parsudih and there was another boy who was after the said girl and therefore she apprehends that the said boy might have got his son Rupesh Kuntia killed.