Patna High CourtCR. MISC./26078/2021bail rejected

Raghu Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

2021-09-13Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26078 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-533 Year-2020 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Raghu Prasad Son Of Dev Mangal R/O Village- Narayanpur, P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kanhaiya Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-09-2021 This matter is taken up for consideration through Video Conferencing.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 533 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498(A), 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, sister of the informant was married with this petitioner 17-18 years ago and also blessed with three children. After marriage, informant's sister was subjected to cruelty and harassment by her husband and inlaws. Ultimately, this petitioner along with FIR named accused persons committed murder of the sister of informant. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26078 of 2021(3) dt.13-09-2021 2/2 deceased was suffering from various disease and died due to illness. As per postmortem report, no external injury was found on the person of deceased and viscera has been preserved and cause of death could not be ascertained as yet. Petitioner has been arrested from his house and this false case has been instituted for taking ornaments and money from the petitioner and petitioner is in custody since17.10.2020 having no criminal antecedent. Chargesheet has already been submitted. Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioner happens to be the husband of deceased and there is specific allegation against this petitioner that he subjected the deceased to cruelty and harrasment.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner abovenamed on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. As the petitioner is in custody since 17.10.2020, trial court is directed to expedite the trial.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T