DHULLU MAHTO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the second attempt by this applicant seeking grant of bail. He is a member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA). From the First Information Report, it appears that an information was received in the police station on 12.05.2013 that, one Rajesh Gupta who was an absconding accused in Baghmara (Barora) P.S. Case No. 121 of 2013 dated 22.04.2013 registered under sections 384 and 386 IPC had come to his house. On receiving such information, the police party proceeded to apprehend the said accused. When the police force reached near his house, the said Rajesh Gupta tried to escape however, he was apprehended by the police and the police party proceeded to take the apprehended accused to the police station. In the meantime, the present applicant along with several other persons and his supporters surrounded the official police vehicle and attacked the police party. The present applicant with the help of others forced open the door of the police vehicle and dragged out the policemen from the vehicle and started abusing them and initiated a scuffle. The present applicant tried to snatch the service pistol of the informant and he torn the uniform of the police constable namely, Ram Bachan Ram. It is also alleged that the present applicant/accused Dhullu Mahto asked the informant to show the warrant of arrest and when the warrant was shown to him, he retorted that he does not recognise any 'Court -Kutchari' and thereafter, the present applicant along with others took away the accused namely, Rajesh Gupta out of the lawful custody of the police and escaped. On the same day at about 14.15 hours, an information was given in the police station and the F.I.R. being Katras P.S. Case No. 120 of 2013 was registered against the present applicant and others under Sections 147, 148, 149, 224, 225, 283, 290, 323, 332, 341, 353, 427 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE learned Senior counsel appearing for the applicant has submitted that after the refusal of bail to the applicant by order dated 14.08.2013, a charge -sheet has been filed on 20.08.2013 and other co -accused persons have been granted bail by order dated 21.09.2013 and since the allegations levelled against the co -accused persons are identical, the applicant is also entitled for grant of bail. He has further submitted that in so far as, the offences alleged against the applicant in the charge -sheet are concerned, maximum punishment prescribed is three years and the offences are triable by Magistrate and thus, in this view of the matter, the applicant who is in judicial custody since 09.07.2013, should be granted bail. He has further submitted that the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit dated 18.10.2013 in which he has explained the circumstances under which he was sent for treatment at All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. The applicant never requested for being sent to New Delhi for medical treatment. He has further submitted that the present case is the outcome of long standing enmity between the Deputy Superintendent of Police who is posted there and against whose illegal demand the applicant who is the M.L.A. of the area has been raising protest and in this connection the applicant has lodged complaints and representation to His Excellency, the Governor of the State of Jharkhand.

(3.) THE record of B.A. No. 7143 of 2013 has been placed on record along with the record of the present case.