RAJ KUMAR
Ranchi, April 7: In a landmark judgment, the Jharkhand High Court has directed the Jharkhand government to pay Rs 50,000 as compensation for keeping an innocent tribal in jail for nine months.
Apart from this, the court also directed the judicial officers to be cautious while dealing with the bail application and restrain themselves from passing mechanical orders rejecting bail applications when there is no material against the person seeking bail.
The high court also directed to transmit its order to Judicial Academy for giving appropriate training to the judicial officers in dealing with cases of similar nature.
Justice Ananda Sen passed the order on Wednesday after the victim of injustice, Shanichara Kol, knocked on the door of the high court for bail explaining how despite being innocent he was arrested by police, and despite his effort, the lower court did not grant him bail.
“Interim bail granted by this Court vide order dated 01.04.2022 in connection with Karmatanr Police Station Case No.47 of 2021 is confirmed and the petitioner will be allowed to remain on the same bail bond. This application is converted to one under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to be listed immediately before an appropriate Bench with the leave of Hon’ble the Chief Justice. The Director-General of Police will take suitable steps to sensitize the investigating officers and the Supervising Officers, who are incharge of investigation in different criminal cases, so those innocent persons, against whom there are no materials, are not harassed and their liberty is not infringed or curtailed at the whims of the investigating officers,” the court ordered.
“Petitioner be paid a compensation of Rs.50,000 to be paid by the State, as without any material against the petitioner, he was taken in custody, thus his liberty was infringed. The said compensation should be paid within four weeks to the petitioner through the Superintendent of Police, Jamtara. Proof of payment of such compensation should be communicated to the Registrar General of this Court by the Superintendent of Police, Jamtara. Judicial Officers, while dealing with bail applications, should be cautious and should not pass mechanical orders rejecting bail applications when there are no materials against the persons seeking bail. Copy of the entire brief alongwith the case diary and the orders of this Court be transmitted to the Judicial Academy, Jharkhand for giving appropriate training to the Judicial Officers in dealing with these types of cases,” the court further directs.
Before passing the order the court observed how the case shocked the conscience of the court.
“There are some cases which really shock the conscience of the Court and this is one of such cases. This case has not only shaken the conscience of this Court but also has shaken the faith of the investigating agency, which has filed the chargesheet in this case against the petitioner. The petitioner has approached this Court by filing a bail application under Section 439 read with Section 440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He has prayed for bail from this Court, as his prayer for bail was rejected by the Principal Sessions Judge, Jamtara in Miscellaneous Criminal Application No.626 of 2021 on 08.10.2021. Petitioner is languishing in custody since 01.07.2021, in fact, for committing no offence whatsoever under any penal statute, far less under the Indian Penal Code. The reason I have reached such a conclusion would be evident from the prosecution story and the statements of several witnesses recorded during the investigation,” the court observed before passing the order.
Advocate Kaushal Kishor Mishra argued on behalf of the petitioner while those representing the state in the case included, AAG II Sachin Kumar, A.A.G. and APP Ashok Singh.
The case arose after a lady committed suicide by hanging herself following some dispute in the family and Sanichara Kol being a neighbor helped bring the hanging body. Later when the parents of the lady registered a murder case in the matter, Kol who was noticed beside the body was made an accused and arrested. Later, the court also rejected his bail application without going through the case diary and observing that there was nothing against Kol.
“On the basis of a fardbeyan of one Mahadeo Mandal, Jamtara (Karmatand) Police Station Case No.47 of 2021 was registered under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant is the father of the deceased, who stated that on 30.06.2021, he received information that her daughter Asha Devi, aged about 36 years, has been murdered in her matrimonial home by the son-in-law of the informant. On receiving the said information, the informant along with his family members and other villagers reached the matrimonial home of her daughter, where he saw her daughter lying dead on a cot. He opined that the deceased was murdered as there was some ligature mark on her neck. He stated that a few days before the incident, there was some land dispute for which there was a quarrel between the husband of the deceased Govind Mandal, his elder brother Naresh Mandal and the deceased. He also stated that Govind Mandal, the husband of the deceased, often used to assault
the deceased. He further narrated that his another daughter was also a
resident of that village and on receipt of the said information about the death of Asha Devi, his another daughter, Tara Devi and other villagers were present there and said Tara Devi stated that when she went to the house of the deceased, she saw this petitioner, namely, Shanichara Kol sitting beside the dead body of the deceased. On the basis of the aforesaid information, the informant concluded that her daughter Asha Devi was beaten to death by her
husband Govind Mandal, her brother-in-law Naresh Mandal and this petitioner,” the court observed in its order.
