Akhilesh Bari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14299 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-231 Year-2024 Thana- JOGAPATTI District- West Champaran ====================================================== Akhilesh Bari S/o Raja Bari R/o ward no. 8, vill - Hathiya Tola, Dabgharwa, P.S.- Jogapatti, Distt.- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vatsal Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 14-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Jogapatti P.S. Case No. 231 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 103, 61(2), 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that daughter of the informant got married with one Rajesh Mahto in the year 2014 and on 13.07.2024, she was done to death by some unknown persons and, thereafter, her dead body was thrown away in the orchard of the village.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14299 of 2025(3) dt.14-05-2025 2/3 transpired in this case during investigation on the basis of confessional statement of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that there is a delay of one day in lodging the FIR without any plausible explanation, which in itself, raises doubt over the prosecution story. Learned counsel further contended that the conduct of the husband of the deceased is suspicious as he did not lodge the case for the whole day even when her wife was missing. Learned counsel further submitted that, as a matter of fact, there was relationship between the petitioner and the deceased and the said fact was well within the knowledge of the family members of the deceased and, therefore, the alleged offence has been committed by the family members of the deceased in order to satisfy their personal vendetta. There is no eye-witness to the alleged occurrence. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 16.07.2024 and has two criminal antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that as per paragraph no. 25 of the case diary, this petitioner has confessed his guilt and specifically stated that all the accused persons including this petitioner hatched a conspiracy and committed the murder of the deceased
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14299 of 2025(3) dt.14-05-2025 3/3 and the statement is further corroborated by the post-mortem report of the deceased.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also there being ample material against the accused persons including this petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T