Chamcham Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Chamcham Devi vs The State of Jharkhand

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Jun 18, 2013

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/972673

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/972673
Court: Jharkhand High Court
Decided On: Jun 18, 2013
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Chamcham Devi

Respondent

The State of Jharkhand

Excerpt

inthehighcourtofjharkhandatranchi a.b.a.no.1498of2013 chamchamdevi petitioner versus thestateofjharkhand oppositeparty coram: honblemr.justiced.n.upadhyay forthepetitioner :mr.r.s.mazumdar,sr.advocate forthestate :a.p .p. 03/18.06.2013 heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. petitionerisaccusedinconnectionwithdugdap.s.caseno.43of2012, correspondingtog.r.caseno.933of2012,pendinginthecourtoflearned additionalchiefjudicialmagistrate,bermoattenughat. itrevealsfromthefardbeyanofthedeceasedthatthepetitionerandother accused,whoarenamedinthef.i.r.,pouredsomeinflammableliquidonher bodyandsetheronfire.incourseoftreatmenttheinformantdied. itissubmittedthatpetitionerisnotdirectlyrelatedwiththehusbandof deceased.shehasbeenlivingseparatelywithherfamilymembersandshehas nothingtodowiththedemandofdowryortorturecommittedontheinformant duringherlifetime. learnedcounselappearingforthestateopposedtheprayerforbailand submitted that para 27 of the original case diary and para 16 of the supplementary case diary indicate that the petitioner was always in visiting termstothehouseoftheinformant. consideringthedirectallegationlevelled,idonotfeelinclinedtogive benefit of section 438 cr.p.c. to the petitioner. accordingly, the prayer for anticipatorybailmadeonbehalfofabovenamedpetitionerstandsrejected. (d.n.upadhyay,j.) nkc

Full Judgment

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI A.B.A.No.1498of2013 ChamchamDevi Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY ForthePetitioner :Mr.R.S.Mazumdar,Sr.Advocate FortheState :A.P .P. 03/18.06.2013 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. PetitionerisaccusedinconnectionwithDugdaP.S.CaseNo.43of2012, correspondingtoG.R.CaseNo.933of2012,pendingintheCourtoflearned AdditionalChiefJudicialMagistrate,BermoatTenughat. Itrevealsfromthefardbeyanofthedeceasedthatthepetitionerandother accused,whoarenamedintheF.I.R.,pouredsomeinflammableliquidonher bodyandsetheronfire.Incourseoftreatmenttheinformantdied. Itissubmittedthatpetitionerisnotdirectlyrelatedwiththehusbandof deceased.Shehasbeenlivingseparatelywithherfamilymembersandshehas nothingtodowiththedemandofdowryortorturecommittedontheinformant duringherlifetime. LearnedcounselappearingfortheStateopposedtheprayerforbailand submitted that para 27 of the original case diary and para 16 of the supplementary case diary indicate that the petitioner was always in visiting termstothehouseoftheinformant. Consideringthedirectallegationlevelled,Idonotfeelinclinedtogive benefit of Section 438 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatorybailmadeonbehalfofabovenamedpetitionerstandsrejected. (D.N.Upadhyay,J.) NKC

Same Court & Year Jharkhand · 2013 Same Parties Chamcham Devi vs The State of Jharkhand Same Subject Criminal