KAMDEO HAZRA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Court: High Court of Jharkhand
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Jharkhand judgment dated 2020-09-14. KAMDEO HAZRA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI [CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION] B. A. No. 4730 of 2020 Kamdeo Hazra …… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO (Through : Video Conference) ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Prashant Kumar Rai, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, A. P. P ----- 02/Dated: 14/09/2020: Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though there are defect nos. 5(e) and 9(i) to 9(xi) in the bail application as pointed out by the stamp reporter but he has filed an undertaking that he shall remove the defects within 30 days after the physical court starts and the bail application may be heard as it is a regular bail in which petitioner is in custody since 04. 01. 2020. Considering the same, this Court is inclined to hear the bail application on merit but with condition that petitioner shall remove the defects within 30 days after the physical court starts.
Joint Registrar (Judicial) is directed to ensure the compliance of this order after the physical court starts so as to remove the defects. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Prashant Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the State, Mrs. Priya Shrestha. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has prayed for grant of regular bail in connection with Jamua Case No. 15 of 2000, corresponding to G. R. No. 146 of 2000, S. T. No. 389 of 2001 for the offence registered under Sections 341, 323, 316 and 447 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has been granted earlier regular bail vide order dated 28. 06. 2006 passed in B. A. No. 4106 of 2006 in connection with Jamua Case No. 15 of 2000, corresponding to G. R. No. 146 of 2000, S. T. No. 389 of 2001 for the offence registered under Sections 341, 323, 316 and 447 IPC, but he filed a representation in the year, 2009, which was rejected and his bail bonds were cancelled.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is an illiterate person and he was not knowing that it amounts to misuse of the privilege of bail. Under the aforesaid circumstances, since the petitioner is in custody since 04. 01. 2020 and undertakes before this Court that he shall remain physically present on each and every date till conclusion of the trial, as such, he -2-may be enlarged on regular bail. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that it has been found that 46% of the criminal trial is pending because of non-appearance of the accused. Present case is the glaring example of such delay in trial, as such, petitioner is not entitle for regular bail though he remained in custody for approximately nine months.
After hearing, learned counsel for the parties and perusing the materials brought on record and looking upon the merit of the case, which is misuse of the privilege of bail, this Court is inclined to grant Bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner (Kamdeo Hazra), is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, at- Giridih in connection with Jamua Case No. 15 of 2000, corresponding to G. R. No. 146 of 2000, S. T. No. 389 of 2001 on the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be deponent/parivikar of the present case namely, Sanjay Kumar Hazra, S/o Kamdev Kumar Hazra, R/o Village- Karodih, P. O. - Berhabad, P. S. - Jamua, District- Giridih, who has furnished photocopy of his UID Card bearing No. 8336 9434 5474 before this Court in the bail application.
Office is directed to send photo copy of the UID Card bearing No. 8336 9434 5474 of deponent along with this order to the court below so as to verify the authenticity of the bailor. (ii) Another bailor shall be father/mother/son/sister/brother. (iii) Petitioner shall appear before the learned trial court on each and every date till conclusion of the trial. (iv) The Jail Authority shall release the petitioner only after his medical check-up. (v) The Civil Surgeon, Giridih is directed to medically examine the petitioner at the time of his release and if require, petitioner shall be taken for quarantine, but if no such requirement is there, he shall be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. (vi) Petitioner shall also comply with all the guidelines issued by the Government to meet the challenges of Covid-19, as the country is passing through Pandemic of Covid-19. ( Kailash Prasad Deo, J. ) Sandeep/R. S.
Source: High Court of Jharkhand. Archive: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.