Patna High CourtCR. MISC./21661/2024bail rejected

Doma Choudhary @ Rajesh Choudhary @ Doman Chaudhri v. The State Of Bihar

2024-03-20Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21661 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2023 Thana- AMDABAD District- Katihar ====================================================== Doma Choudhary @ Rajesh Choudhary @ Doman Chaudhri Son of Late Ramji Choudhary Resident of Village- Kasba Tola, Gadai Diyara, Ward No. 11, P.S.- Amdabad, District- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bimal Kumar, Adv..

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 20-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Amdabad P.S. Case No.168 of 2023 lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 302 and 504 of the I.P.C.

3. As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been lodged against eleven named accused persons including the petitioner against whom there is allegation of assaulting the husband of the informant due to which he died.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that the petitioner is completely innocent and only with a view to club the entire family members, he has been made accused.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21661 of 2024(2) dt.20-03-2024 2/2

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 19.01.2024 having clean antecedent. He submits that the petitioner is ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon him.

6. Counsel also submits that the other co-accused has been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.02.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 7099/2024.

7. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of assault.

8. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected at this stage, but liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail 9 months after framing of charge.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T