Sanjay Kumar Chourasiya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24735 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1054 Year-2022 Thana- KHAJANCHI HAT District- Purnia ====================================================== SANJAY KUMAR CHOURASIYA Son of Satan Chaurasiya Resident of village Sarda Nagar, P.S.-K.Hat (Sahayak), District-Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.A.K. Thakur, Adv.

Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Mr. Ritwik Thakur For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satya Nand Shukla ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 04-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 363, 365 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 302, 120(B) of the IPC were added subsequently.

As per prosecution case, informant son, namely, Suchit Kumar @ Paltu left the house on 6.10.2022 with one unknown boy and since then he was traceless and his phone is switched off then the FIR was registered against unknown on 8.10.2022.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case due to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24735 of 2023(3) dt.04-07-2023 2/2 previous enmity. Petitioner is not named in the FIR. Save and except, his self confessional statement, no consistent evidence has come against the petitioner. Son of the informant was of criminal mentality and presently he was absconding the case instituted in K. Hat police station. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 14.10.2022.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submitted that confessional statement of the petitioner is leading to recovery of dead body of informant's son. In para 84 of the case diary, petitioner confessed his guilt and he specifically stated that he has murdered the deceased and at his instance dead body was recovered, which is mentioned in para 71 of the case diary.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U