✦ High Court of India

1. 2. Tuklal Saw Somari Devi @ Ful Kumari Devi @ Anjani Devi v. …

Case Details

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction) B.A .No. 6187 of 2023 1. 2. Tuklal Saw Somari Devi @ Ful Kumari Devi @ Anjani Devi Versus … … Petitioners The State of Jharkhand ------ CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA … … Opposite Party ------- For the Petitioners For the State

Legal Reasoning

: Mr. B.M. Tripathy, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Naveen Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, APP -------- 03 /06.10.2023 Heard the learned counsels for the parties. The petitioners are accused in a case registered under sections 302/201/120B of Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the FIR of the instant case was lodged on the basis of written report of informant stating and alleging therein that his grand son, namely, Deepak Kumar aged about 12 years was sleeping after taking dinner in his house and the daughter-in-law of the informant was engaged in household works. On 07.10.2022 both the petitioners picked the grandson of the informant dropped him in the well situated near the house after committing his murder. After extensive search, the dead body of grandson of informant was recovered from the well in the morning. He has further submitted that there is no eye witness to the occurrence, however, it seems that the allegation in the FIR is only based on suspicion. It is further submitted that the background of the case is that the informant and the petitioners are full brothers and sisters and they were on inimical terms due to distribution of property. Learned counsel has submitted that the deceased had tripped in the well in the night and thereafter his dead body was recovered in the morning and after preparing inquest report the dead body was sent for postmortem. The stomach contained water and the cause of death was opined as asphyxia due to drowning. It is further submitted that there is no sign of any prior assault made before the drowning. The postmortem report falsifies the allegation that the grandson was done to death and thrown into the well. It is only when the dead body of child was recovered thereafter the villagers have attacked upon the petitioners and later on police saved them from the mob- -2- lynching. It is further submitted that attempt has been made to develop the case of confession leading to recovery and extra judicial confession by application of coercion. The manner in which the confession has been extracted clearly has no validity in the eyes of law. It is strange that even when the boy was sleeping in the house that none of them have noticed anyone picking and taking the sleeping child nor the child raised any alarm. Therefore, it is the case of the petitioners that the child himself went towards the well and accidentally tripped into the well. It is further submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted and the petitioners are in custody from 10.10.2022 and in the circumstances as aforesaid, bail may be allowed to them. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail petition and referred to his counter affidavit and reiterated the contents of the FIR and pointed out para six of his counter affidavit and he has further submitted that that the case diary reveals that police had got information as rumor that in Jeruadih a child has been stolen for which sanha no. 33 of 2022 was entered and police proceeded for verifying the truth of the said information, when the police reached village Jeruadih the villagers were assaulting the accused for committing the offence, the police got them rescued. Thereafter when the police were returning the villagers stopped the vehicle and asked them to hand over the accused persons to them. Visualizing the seriousness of the condition the officer-in-charge gave information to the higher officials and thereafter the accused persons were rescued from the mob-lynching. It is further submitted that the inquest report of the deceased was prepared on 08.10.2022 at about 11.10 near the house of the deceased in presence of the witnesses, namely, Raju Sao and Jugali Sao. As per the inquest the deceased was said to have been thrown after killing in the well or pushed into the well. It is further submitted that during investigation the restatement of the informant has been recorded wherein he has reiterated the allegation made by him in the FIR. He has further said that from 07.10.2022 at about 9 PM, his grand son was missing from the house and whole night he along with other villagers tried to search him but could not find him. On the next date, the villagers had seen the accused and on being enquired, he gave wrong answers and when the villagers exerted pressure on him, he said that whom they are searching, he will be found in -3- the well, thereafter the dead body was found and he has also confessed that the villagers due to land dispute they had committed the deed. Learned counsel further stated that other witnesses have also supported the case of the prosecution Having heard both counsels, gone through the records of the case and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioners, named above, on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Principal Sessions Judge, Giridih in connection with Dhanwar ( Ghorthambha O.P.) P.S. Case No. 251 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No. 66 of 2023 and S.T. No. 66 of 2023, subject to the condition that the petitioners shall report to the concerned police station on every last Saturday of the month, between 01:00 and 05:00 p.m for one year, failing which or if any adverse remarks regarding their non-appearance at the police station, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled. Any exemption to such attendance shall be done so after direction of the learned Court below and the petitioners shall remain present on each and every date of trial before the Court below unless dispensed with by the learned Court below. Sharda/ (Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments