Sukhalu Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12047 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2020 Thana- PARSABAZAR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

SUKHALU MANJHI S/o Chhotan Manjhi R/o village- Sahpur Musahari, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, District- Patna.

2.

Laxhuman Manjhi S/o Dahriya Manjhi R/o village- Sahpur Musahari, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, District- Patna.

3.

Bifan Manjhi S/o Krishna Manjhi R/o village- Sahpur Musahari, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shailesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 28-02-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Parsa Bazar P.S. Case No. 211 of 2020 registered for offence punishable under sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant got an information that the dead body of his cousin brother Lalan Kumar @ Lala Rai is lying in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12047 of 2021(3) dt.28-02-2022 2/3 house of accused Mamta Devi in village Shanhpur Mushari. He reached to the house of Mamta Devi. He saw that after committing murder of his cousin brother, the dead body was found in semi-burnt condition. It has been mentioned in the F.I.R. that in preceding night at 11 A.M., the deceased received a telephonic call and thereafter, he went to Shanhpur Mushari where the eight F.I.R. named accused persons, including the present petitioners after committing his murder, attempted to burn the dead body, which was found in semi-burnt condition. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there was a pressure on the petitioners to be witness in this case against Mamta Devi and it was the reason for their false implication in this case. He has next submitted that the petitioners have no concern with Mamta Devi or the deceased. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail.

The order of Additional Sessions Judge-XVII, Patna dated 07.12.2020 shows that the witnesses, namely, Uday Kumar, Rajendra Rai, Rudal Kumar and Yogendra Prasad have substantiated the allegation against the petitioners. As per paragraph 98 of the case diary, the investigation is still going on and the emerging of further material cannot be ruled out.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12047 of 2021(3) dt.28-02-2022 3/3 At this stage, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioners within the stipulated time mentioned hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey , J) Mahesh/- U T