DEEPAK KUMAR SINGH ALIAS KALLU SARDAR ALIAS DIPAK SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./2497/2025 · 2025-03-27
Ambuj Nath
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7589 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7589 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 2497 of 2025
-------
Deepak Kumar Singh @ Kallu Sardar @ Dipak Singh, son of Prem Singh, aged about 36 years, resident of Road No.1, Bagbera, P.O. & P.S. Bagbera, District East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur. …... …. Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
.…. …. Opp. Party
--------
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
-------- For the Petitioner(s)
: Mr. Jitesh Kumar, Advocate For the State
: Mrs. Ruby Pandey, A.P. P.
--------
02/ Dated 27.03.2025
Heard the parties.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Parsudih (Bagbera) P.S. Case No. 204 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. Case No.2432 of 2011(S), S.T. Case No.9 of 2022, for the offence registered under Sections 302, 201, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Sri Nishant Kumar, learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur.
Bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No.10930/2021.
It is alleged that the petitioner and co-accused persons took the son of the informant and thereafter, his dead body was recovered from a dry pond at Sanjay Nagar.
It appears that trial of the case is under progress and the prosecution has examined five witnesses, out of nine witnesses.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that co-accused had faced separate trial and he has been acquitted in this case. It was further submitted that petitioner is in custody since 18.03.2021.
Considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is hereby rejected at this stage.
Learned Trial Court shall take all possible steps to conclude the trial within six months from the next date fixed for recording of evidence. If the trial is not concluded within the said period, petitioner if so advised may renew his prayer for bail.
(Ambuj Nath, J.) BS/-