Alam Ansari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21277 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-427 Year-2019 Thana- SIWAN MUFFASIL District- Siwan ====================================================== ALAM ANSARI S/o- KALAMUDDIN ANSARI Resident of VillageMaulanapur P.S.- Siwan Mufassil Dist- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
M/s K.N. Choubey, Sr. Advocate Prashant Kumar, Shashank Shekhar Dubey, Ritu Priyadarshini, Advocates For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Md. Ataul Haque, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 17-05-2023
1. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail in connection with Sessions Trial no. 94 of 2020, arising out of Siwan Mufassil P.S. Case no. 427 of 2019, registered under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, over a dispute it is stated that the accused persons came variously armed and the petitioner assaulted the mother of the informant with an iron rod on her head leading to her death.
4. The earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 8.12.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. no.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21277 of 2023(4) dt.17-05-2023 2/3 22269 of 2021 and again by order dated 31.8.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. no. 28975 of 2022.
5. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected on earlier occasion on merit. This Court had taken note of the fact that in course of investigation in paragraph nos. 6 and 7 of the case diary it has been stated that it was Kalamuddin Ansari who was the assailant of the deceased and not the petitioner herein. Further referring to the deposition of the two prosecution witnesses examined in course of trial, it is submitted that it was the neighbours of the co-villager who gave information to the police station and on the police coming, the body was taken to the hospital for postmortem examination. The petitioner is in custody since 23.12.2020 and undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
6. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State who submits that even besides the petitioner being named in the FIR as the assailant, the prosecution witnesses in course of trial have supported the prosecution case.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties. From the contents of the FIR the allegation against the petitioner is that as a result of his assaulting the mother of the informant with an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21277 of 2023(4) dt.17-05-2023 3/3 iron rod on her head, she died. This is supported by the contents of the postmortem examination report of the deceased as also by the two prosecution witnesses, namely, PW 1 Kyamuddin Ansari and PW 2 Farukh Ansari who have categorically stated in the trial that it was as a result of the blow given with an iron rod by the petitioner that the mother of the informant sustained serious injuries and died.
8. In view of the facts of the case, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
9. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) Spd/- U T