Indrajeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13425 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-425 Year-2021 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Indrajeet Kumar S/o- Sri Sita Ram Mahto R/v- Panapur Ps- Bidupur distVaishal ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 12-03-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Bidupur P.S.Case no. 425 of 2021 registered under sections 304B, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that her daughter was married to the petitioner in the year 2016. There was repeated demand of money and on non-fulfilment of the same, she was abused and assaulted by the accused persons including the petitioner herein who happens to be the husband of the deceased. Ultimately the daughter of the informant was killed and her body disposed of.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13425 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 2/2 case only on account of being husband of the deceased. Neither the informant is an eye witness to the occurrence nor any of the allegations have been substantiated in course of investigation. The petitioner along with others had moved this Court for grant of anticipatory bail. The other accused persons including Renu Devi, Sita Ram Mahto and Avinash Kumar were granted anticipatory bail while this petitioner whose application was rejected, surrendered within the time fixed. The petitioner is in custody since 14.8.2023 and chargesheet has been submitted in the case.

5. Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the F.I.R., the petitioner being the husband of the deceased and the body of the daughter of the informant having been disposed of by the accused persons as per allegations in the FIR, the Court is not inclined to inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is dismissed.

7. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash U T