Punit Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17433 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2023 Thana- SIKANDRA District- Jamui ====================================================== Punit Singh S/o Rambriksh Singh R/o vill - Achambho, P.S. - Sikandra, Distt. - Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 14-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sikandra P.S. Case No. 91 of 2023, lodged on 30.03.2023 under Sections 304(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, FIR has been lodged against five named accused persons including the present petitioner against whom there is an allegation that all the accused persons in connivance with each other have killed the informant's daughter.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel also submits that from the contents of the FIR, it becomes very much clear that the petitioner who is the husband of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17433 of 2024(2) dt.14-03-2024 2/3 deceased is working in a private company at Madras and it is alleged that on his mobile, the petitioner has instigated his other family members to kill the informant's daughter due to which they have killed the informant's daughter. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is not present at the place of occurrence, rather, he has come later on.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that police after completion of the investigation has filed the chargesheet under section 498(A), 306, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Counsel further submits that vide Annexure-2, the informant has filed a petition in which he has disclosed that his daughter was killed at sasural and the petitioner was working at Madras. Counsel also submits that in the application filed before the Trial Court, the informant has disclosed that the death has been caused due to pain in the chest.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he is in custody since 04.10.2023. Counsel further submits that other coaccused persons have been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.01.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 598 of 2024.

7. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17433 of 2024(2) dt.14-03-2024 3/3 bail of the petitioner.

8. Upon specific query of the Court from the counsel for petitioner that whether charge has been framed in this case or not, counsel submits that he is not aware that whether charge has been framed or not.

9. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, let the petitioner above named be granted bail, but only after framing of charge, if not framed on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamui in connection with Sikandra P.S. Case No. 91 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s 437(3) Cr.P.C. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Divyansh/- U T