MANIKA MUNDA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Petitioner is an accused for the offences punishable under Sections 307/353 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 25(1-B)a/26/27/35 of the Arms Act and Section 17 of Criminal Law Amendment Act.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It is alleged that during encounter between the police party and a group of extremist organization, the members of extremist organization were calling each other by name which was overheard by the police party. Though the F.I.R. is of the year 2013, yet the petitioner has been remanded in this case on 12.10.2017 from another case and since then he is in custody. There is no recovery of any incriminating article/weapon from the possession of the petitioner. As such at least considering the length of judicial custody, the petitioner may be given the privilege of regular bail.