Santosh Kumar @ Munna @ Santosh Kumar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22289 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-175 Year-2021 Thana- CHERIYA BARIYARPUR DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Santosh Kumar @ Munna @ Santosh Kumar Sharma Son Of Ram Chandra Sharma R/O Village- Karor, Khanjhanpur, Ward No.16, P.S.- Cheriya Bariyarpur, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

The State Of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 17-08-2022 Let the defect, if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

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

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Cheriya Bariyarpur P.S. Case No. 175 of 2021 lodged under Section 302/34 of Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the allegation made against the petitioner and his father to kill the wife/daughter-inlaw. On the basis of the statement made by the children of the petitioner and on their statement, the dead body was recovered. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no eye witness in this case. Not a single witness in the entire case diary indicates that how death has been caused. He submits

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22289 of 2022( 3) dt.17-08-2022 2/2 that the petitioner is in custody since 20.12.2021. He further submits that charge sheet has already been filed and petitioner has clean antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that case diary has been called for, from the case diary, it transpires that in the family son, father, daughter-in-law and children used to reside and dead body was recovered from the safety tank of the same house. The allegation of assault by the petitioner and his father was supported by the children of the deceased (petitioner's son).

A stage of trial has also been called for. Case is fit for framing of charge.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at present stage. He may renew his prayer for bail after one year of framing of charge.

With this observation, the bail application stands rejected.

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