← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6183/2018rejected

Pradeep Soni v. The State Of Bihar

2018-03-14Mr. Justice Arun Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.6183 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -100 Year- 2017 Thana -NAVHATTA District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================

1. Pradeep Soni, Son of Late Banshi Soni, Resident of Village- Nauhatta, P.S.- Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Nandan Sahay, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 14-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner, already in custody, seeks bail in connection with Nauhatta P.S.Case No. 100 of 2017, registered under Sections 341, 323, 302 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation in brief is that the accused persons assaulted the informant's wife and specific allegation against the petitioner is that he killed the wife of the informant by pressing her neck Submission is that on 01.10.2017 at 8.30 A.M. the alleged occurrence took place and the Post mortem was held on the same day at 5 P.M. but time elapsed since death is within twelve to twenty four hours approximately, so prosecution case becomes doubtful.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6183 of 2018 (3) dt.14-03-2018 2/2 Learned counsel for the State submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of killing the deceased and post mortem report of the deceased, reveals that the cause of death is strangulation, supporting the allegation and time elapsed after death is in near proximity.

Having considered the specific allegation against the petitioner of killing the deceased, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected at this stage.

The petitioner is in jail custody since 30.10.2017, so the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously.

(Arun Kumar, J) Sudha/- U T