Mithlesh Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18282 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-159 Year-2021 Thana- DHANARUA District- Patna ====================================================== MITHLESH MANJHI SON OF RAJ KUMAR MANJHI R/O VILLAGEAKAUNA, P.S.- DHANRUA, DISTRICT- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

M/s Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate Anuj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 16-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the informant was married to the petitioner. It is stated by the informant that he received information about the death of his daughter. On reaching his daughter's house, he saw a ligature mark around her neck.

It is submitted by learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case only for the reason that he happens to be the husband of the deceased. He is innocent. The postmortem report does not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18282 of 2022(4) dt.16-01-2023 2/2 support the case of murder. In fact it is a case of suicide. The petitioner is in custody since 26.6.2021 and has no criminal antecedent.

On specific query made by the Court, it is submitted that as per instruction received, charge has not been framed in the learned trial court.

Heard learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation in the FIR against the petitioner who happens to be the husband of the deceased together with the material that has transpired in course of investigation, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail in the learned trial court on charge being framed. In case such an application is preferred, the same shall be considered and decided on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order of rejection.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Spd/- U T