← Library
Patna High CourtCR. APP (SJ)/832/2025bail rejected

Ajay Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2025-04-11Mr. Justice Purnendu Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.832 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-782 Year-2023 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran ====================================================== Ajay Rai S/O Raghunandan Rai @ Raghunan Ray, Resident of VillageMubarakpur, Police Station- Marhaura, Dist.- Saran. ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Rishi Munny Devi Wife of Tribhuwan Manjhi R/O Vill.- Baidapur, P.O.- Bardhania, P.S.- Marhaura, Dist.- Saran ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Krishna Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Ms.Usha Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-04-2025 Heard Mr. Krishna Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Ms. Usha Kumari, learned APP for the State.

2. The present memo of appeal has been preferred against the order dated 12.11.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST), Chapra, Saran in Marhaura P.S. Case No.782 of 2023, registered under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby and whereunder the prayer for regular bail of the appellant has been rejected.

3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.832 of 2025(3) dt.11-04-2025 2/2 deceased and the appellant cooked fish and ate together and just next day, the deceased was found dead in a field. There is direct allegation against the appellant.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Appellant is in custody since 24.10.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

6. Considering the nature of allegation made in the FIR and the chain of event, I find that the complicity of the appellant, who was last seen along with the deceased, in the alleged commission of murder cannot be ruled out and, as such, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the appellant at this stage. Accordingly, the present appeal stands dismissed. (Purnendu Singh, J) Sanjay/- U T