Patna High CourtCR. MISC./22164/2023rejected

Sunny Kumar @ Lukky Kumar @ Sanny Kumar @ Lakky Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2023-07-26Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22164 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-443 Year-2022 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna ====================================================== Sunny Kumar @ Lukky Kumar @ Sanny Kumar @ Lakky Kumar Son Of Late Sanoj Singh R/O Village- Ghoddaur, P.S.- Punpun, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Deovind Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Yogendra Kumar,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 23.05.2022 in connection with S.T. No.982 of 2022 arising out of Bihta P.S. Case No. 443 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 10.05.2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith other co-accused persons have in furtherance of their common intention committed the dowry death of the daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. He has falsely been implicated in the present case. Further submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22164 of 2023(4) dt.26-07-2023 2/2 allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Further submits that the present occurrence had taken place in the inlaws house of the petitioner and it has come during investigation that the room was closed from inside.

5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State, on the other hand, have opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it has come during investigation that the petitioner has committed the murder of his wife and the postmortem report also supports the same.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with S.T. No.982 of 2022 arising out of Bihta P.S. Case No. 443 of 2022 pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Danapur, Patna.

7. Prayer is refused.

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