Arman Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29886 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-528 Year-2019 Thana- SIKARPUR District- West Champaran ====================================================== ARMAN ANSARI S/o Bashir Ansari Resident of Village-Sonarpatti, Tola Muhammadpur, P.S.-Shikarpur, District-West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. N. Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 528 of 2019 instituted for the offences under Sections 376, 324, 307, 326 of the Indian Penal Code in which section 302 IPC was added later on.

The prosecution allegation, in short, is that the accused person established physical relation with the victim on the assurance of the marriage and later started denying. Later, the accused person entered into the house of the informant and after pouring K. Oil, set fire on her due to which the victim burned badly and later died during treatment. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 10.12.2019 and has got no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29886 of 2020(3) dt.06-01-2021 2/2 criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. Charge-sheet has been submitted in the present case. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is a love affairs between the petitioner and the victim. From perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that the informant is not an eye witness to the alleged occurrence.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. There is specific allegation against the petitioner who had poured K. Oil on the body of the deceased and set fire. The post-mortem report also supports the allegation made in the F.I.R.

Considering the same, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected. The Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial at the earliest preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Pankaj/- U T