Narendra Kumar @ Butan Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8280 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2018 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Gaya ====================================================== Narendra Kumar @ Butan Singh Son of Late Baidehi Sharan Singh R/OKorap, P.S.-Konch, Distt.-Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Shivendra Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Surendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 19-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 17 of 2018 instituted for the offences under Sections 341, 342, 379, 323, 307, 498(A), 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The petitioner along with other accused persons had earlier moved before this Court for anticipatory bail in Cr. Misc. 44350 of 2019 but, vide order dated 12.04.2023, all were granted anticipatory bail except the present petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner also filed SLP (Cr.) No. 33243 of 2023 before the Hon'ble Apex Court but, vide order dated 06.10.2023, the same was withdrawn.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8280 of 2024(2) dt.19-02-2024 2/3
4. As per prosecution case, the marriage of the Informant was performed with the son of the petitioner. As per allegation, the petitioner along with other co-accused persons demanded money from the father of the Informant for construction of house. Thereafter, the father of the Informant paid Rs. 8,50,000/- in the bank account of the petitioner. The petitioner also paid Rs. 4,00,000/- in cash to the petitioner. The petitioner again demanded Rs. 1,50,000/- but, the father of the Informant could not fulfill the demand. Thereafter, the petitioner along with other accused persons attempt to kill the victim/Informant by setting her on fire but, any how, she escaped.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner is the father-in-law of the Informant. He submits that there is no evidence to support the case of the Informant that she was attempted to be killed and, hence, Section 307 of the I.P.C. is not made out against the petitioner. There is no direct and specific allegation of assault against the petitioner rather the same is simple and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the present bail application. The petitioner is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8280 of 2024(2) dt.19-02-2024 3/3 languishing in judicial custody since 04.12.2023. The husband of the Informant is already on bail.
6. Per contra, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the period of custody of the petitioner as also the petitioner having no criminal antecedent, and considering the fact there is no specific and direct allegation against the petitioner, let the petitioner, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 17 of 2018.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) rishi/- U T