SUNDERSAI MAHTO & ORS Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Interlocutory Application, the appellant no.8 namely Jagtu Lohra has prayed for his release on bail, during pendency of the appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though the appellant's prayer for bail was earlier rejected, he has remained in custody for seven years. The F.I.R. is against unknown persons. The appellant and others were taken into custody only on suspicion. There is no cogent material on record to establish the charge. The appellant no.3 namely Padmalochan Mahto with the identical facts and materials on record has been granted bail by this court vide order No.12 dated 22nd August, 2013.

(2.) Learned A.P.P. and Mr. A. K. Sahani, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposed the prayer for bail, but has not disputed the said facts and contentions based on record.

(3.) Regard being had to the long custody and other facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant no.8 namely Jagtu Lohra, is directed to be released on bail, during the pendency of appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount, each, to the satisfaction of Additional Judicial Commissioner No.XIth, Ranchi, in connection with Sessions Trial No.638 of 2003/ Sessions Trial No.323 of 2004.