Rajesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24508 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-90 Year-2020 Thana- AMDABAD District- Katihar ====================================================== RAJESH SINGH son of Raj Kumar Singh @ Rajkumar Singh Resident of village- Binod Tola, P.S- Amdabad Dist- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajendra Prasad Sah, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Amdabad P.S.Case No.90 of 2020 registered for the offence under Section 302 of IPC.

The prosecution case as per fardbeyan of one Vijay Singh, the father of deceased Chumki Kumari recorded on 13.05.2020 at 12.20 hours in short, is that his daughter Chumki Kumari was married with the petitioner about a year ago. Since about 2 months Rajesh Singh was residing at his place as GharJamai. On 13.05.2020 at about 11.00 hours his daughter and his son-in-law were having exchange of hot words. The petitioner assaulted with knife on the stomach of his daughter Chumki Kumari several times and she died immediately thereafter his son-in-law Rajesh Singh fled away.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24508 of 2021(5) dt.08-03-2022 2/2 petitioner has clean antecedent. He has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that as per allegation no one is eye witness of the alleged occurrence. He further submits that the alleged victim has been recovered on the basis of the self-confessional statement of the petitioner. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the basis of the material available on the record and the case diary, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the postmortem report of the deceased levelled the allegation as alleged in the FIR and para-10,11,29 and 30 of the case diary several witnesses supported the case of the prosecution.

Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Amdabad P.S.Case No.90 of 2020 pending in the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-VII, Katihar. Prayer is refused.

However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T