Sateyndra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7598 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-353 Year-2020 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia ====================================================== Sateyndra Kumar S/o- Jagjivan Village- Aundi Ps- Pepna Dist- Balia U.P ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajit Kumar Ojha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-03-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 376, 323 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the second attempt of the petitioner to seek bail. It is next submitted that petitioner is in custody since 05.10.2020. It is further submitted that petitioner is alleged to have entered the house of informant and forcibly raped her in which she got injured and when her husband came, he assaulted him by a sharp edged weapon on his elbow and also banged the head of the informant and fled and the husband of the informant while on way to the hospital died. It is next submitted that this aspect
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7598 of 2024(3) dt.20-03-2024 2/3 of the matter was considered by this Court while rejecting the bail application of the petitioner in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 34386 of 2021. It is further submitted that the informant and the petitioner were in a relationship and the petitioner in absence of her husband had entered the house of the informant when her husband came but then the petitioner while fleeing may have assaulted the husband of the informant but the assault was on non-vital part of the body, as such, it cannot be said that on account of assault on hand, the husband of the informant would have died. It is next submitted that altogether there are six prosecution witnesses, out of which only doctor has been examined till date and the petitioner is in custody since 05.10.2020. It is also submitted that informant for reasons best known is not appearing before the learned Trial Court for getting herself examined. It is next submitted that the petitioner will not abscond rather will co-operate in the trial.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the period of incarceration and the nature of allegation as alleged in the FIR, the petitioner abovenamed is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7598 of 2024(3) dt.20-03-2024 3/3 sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 353 of 2020.
6. However, if it comes to the notice of the learned Trial Court that the petitioner after obtaining bail is trying to delay the trial in any manner, in that event, the learned Trial Court shall forthwith cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner and take all coercive steps to ensure that petitioner is behind bars. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T