JUDGEMENT
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY,J. -
(1.) Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with
Seraidhela P.S. Case No.134 of 2019 registered under sections
302 / 364 / 120B / 201 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. P.P. for the State.
(3.) The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in criminal
conspiracy with co-accused persons have abducted the deceased
and murdered them and caused disappearance of the evidence of
the occurrence committed by them. Drawing attention of this
Court to Annexure-3 which is a report lodged by the informant
immediately after the death of the deceased persons namely Kirtan
Mandal and his wife Puja Devi, it is submitted that therein it has
been mentioned that the deceased informed the informant i.e. her
father over phone that she has been set on fire and when the
informant reached the place of occurrence and the patrolling party
on hearing noise of weeping came there and enquired from the
informant. It is further alleged that the police patrolling party
entered inside the house after breaking the lock and the informant
also went inside and saw that the deceased Kirtan Mandal has
hanged himself with a rope and in another room mother of Kirtan
Mandal, the daughter of the informant and his grandchildren were
confined and the latch was closed from the outside. It is also
alleged that the daughter of the informant was taken to P.M.C.H.
and admitted as an indoor patient and Kirtan Mandal was also
taken by the police patrolling party and the daughter of the
informant died on 28.11.2018. In the complaint which upon being
forwarded to police under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C ., this FIR has been
lodged, it is alleged by the informant that the petitioner nos.1, 2, 3
who are the stepbrothers of Kirtan Mandal and the petitioner no.4
is the nephew of Kirtan Mandal being the son of petitioner no.2
used to threaten Kirtan Mandal to transfer his share of land in their
favour or else he will face dire consequences. In the complaint, it
has also been alleged that when after getting information from
some persons that his daughter has been burnt, the informant
reached the place of occurrence; he found the door locked from
outside and the petitioner nos.1 and 3 came there and told that
Kirtan has committed suicide and they will not open the door and
while the informant was proceeding to the police station on the
way, he met with the patrolling vehicle and informed them about
the entire occurrence and after breaking open the lock, it was
found that Kirtan Mandal has committed suicide by hanging
himself in the Verandah and inside the room the daughter of the
informant was lying with burn injuries and his daughter
succumbed to the said burn injuries at P.M.C.H. during the course
of treatment and the deceased daughter of the informant informed
the informant that the petitioners have forcibly hanged Kirtan
Mandal by tying a rope on his neck in the Verandah and after
catching hold of the daughter of the informant poured kerosene
over her in which her mother-in-law also cooperated with the
petitioners and the petitioners set her on fire. The complainant
disclosed everything to police and police after writing everything
obtained the signature of the informant and went away and after
remaining under treatment for three days, the daughter of the
informant died. Thereafter the informant went to the house of his
daughter and found only the mother-in-law and three and half
year old granddaughter of the informant was present and no one
else was there. The informant took his granddaughter along with
him and his grandson has been abducted and is missing and
thereafter, the informant went to the police station where he was
driven away by the police hence, he lodged the complaint. It is
next submitted that the complaint has been lodged on 11.01.2019
whereas date of occurrence is on 26.11.2018. It is also submitted
that the house of the deceased is situated at a distance of 300
metres from the house of the petitioners. It is further submitted
that in the video produced by the informant before the police, the
victim Puja Devi has not taken the name of the petitioners and
Title Partition Suit No. 23 of 2003 is pending in the court of Sub-
Judge, First Court, Dhanbad in which the deceased and the
petitioners were the plaintiffs and Upendra Mandal and Others
were the defendants. It is next submitted that after the death of
Kirtan Mandal, his son and daughter namely Pawan Mandal and
Payal Kumari being minor have been substituted in Title Partition
Suit No.23 of 2003. It is further submitted that the allegation
against the petitioners are all false. It is next submitted that the
petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in
paragraph no. 22 of the anticipatory bail application. Hence, it is
submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory
bail.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.