High Court Jharkhand High Court

Kamdeo Pandit & Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 August, 2011

Jharkhand High Court
Kamdeo Pandit & Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 August, 2011
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                    B.A. No.5133 of 2011
                                          ------
            1. Kamdeo Pandit
            2. Hemi Pandit
            3. Rekha Pandit @ Rekha Devi
            4. Sahdeo Pandit                                    ...       ......          Petitioners
                                     Versus

            The State of Jharkhand                 ....   ...   ....     ...             Opp. Party
                                          ------

             CORAM:         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
                                      ------
             For the Petitioners      :      Mr. Kaushal Kishor Mishra, Advocate
             For the Opp. Party       :      A.P.P.
                                             -----

03 /19.08.2011

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioners are accused in a case registered under Sections 498-A, 307, 323 &

342/34 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Jamtara (Mihijam) P.S. Case

No.117 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. Case No.305 of 2011 which is pending in the

Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamtara.

It is alleged that the victim, who happens to be cousin sister of informant, was

subjected to torture and treated with cruelty. The petitioners and the husband

hatched out a conspiracy and set the victim on fire. When the informant and

relatives of the victim wanted to take her to a hospital for treatment, they were also

assaulted by the accused persons. Lastly, the victim was shifted to hospital at the

instance of her parents and relatives and according to medical report she was having

25-30% burn injury on her person which is apparent from para-25 of the case diary.

It is submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against

all the accused persons. As a matter of fact the victim had sustained burn injury

accidentally in course of cooking and she has not lodged any case.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

Perused the case diary. It appears that the victim has been examined in

para-35 of the case diary and she has supported the prosecution case alleging therein

that she was burnt by the accused persons and luckily her life has been saved.

Considering aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am not inclined to enlarge the

petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of above named petitioners

stands rejected.

(D.N. Upadhyay, J)
NKC