Ram Lakhan Sao vs State Of Jharkhand on 3 January, 2011

                  In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi

                       Cr. App. (D.B) No.987 of 2010

               Ram Lakhan Sao              .............................Appellant

                               VERSUS

               State of Jharkhand       ...................... ...............Respondent


               CORAM:        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHIL HARKAULI
                              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD

               For the Appellants :Mr. P.C.Tripathy, Sr.Advocate
               For the Respondent: A.P.P

3/ 3.1.11

. Heard learned counsel for both sides on the question of bail during the pendency of this

appeal.

The F.I.R has been lodged by the sister of the accused. According to F.I.R, the

sister says that the accused was not on good terms with the father of the accused because of property

dispute relating to property accumulated by the father. Thereafter the sister says in the F.I.R that her

son heard in the market that the accused had murdered the father of the accused, and the son and came

back and informed the sister. The informant (sister) thereafter went to the spot on a motor cycle along

with her son and found her father murdered. The murder is alleged to have taken place at about 4 P.M,

thus it is a broad day light incident.We do not find any motive on the part of the sister of the accused to

make such false statement against her brother in the F.I.R lodged under her signature. Her turning

hostile during her deposition in court does not detract from the fact that the F.I.R had been lodged by

her with this kind of allegation.

The accused happened to be in the village on the day when the deceased was

murdered His presence is corroborated by his arrest from the village next day. It may be mentioned

here that the accused is a resident of a far away place in Chhatishgarh.

The argument that the witness P.W.7 remained silent after witnessing the crime
also does not appeal to us. She must have mentioned this fact in the market where she went to sell

vegetables, from where the son of the informant heard about this and informed his mother..

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that it is

not a fit case for grant of bail to the appellant. Hence the prayer for bail of the appellant is rejected.

Hearing of the appeal may be expedited.

(Sushil Harkauli, J.)

( R.R.Prasad, J. )

ND/