Ajay Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30426 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-351 Year-2020 Thana- BHABHUA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== 1.

Ajay Sah, S/o Prem Chand Sah, Resident of Village-Purab Pokhara Bhabua Ward No.25, P.S-Bhabua, District-Kaimur at Bhabua. 2.

Bikki Sah @ Vikki Sah, S/o Prem Chand Sah, Resident of Village-Purab Pokhara Bhabua Ward No.25, P.S-Bhabua, District-Kaimur at Bhabua. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 06-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

The petitioners seek bail in connection with Bhabua (Sonhan) P.S. Case No.351 of 2020 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending in the court of learned C.J.M., Kaimur at Bhabua.

The specific case in the F.I.R. is that a dead body has been recovered in a plastic bag. The petitioners' implication is at the subsequent stage during the course of investigation. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners' implication is merely based on suspicion.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30426 of 2020(4) dt.06-01-2021 2/2 Nobody has seen the occurrence and under such circumstances, the petitioners are suffering custody since 22.06.2020. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. Referring to the order of rejection by the court below, it is pointed out that the petitioners' arrest has led to recovery of incriminating articles, including the mobile set of the victim and motorcycles etc. The circumstances are such so as to make out a strong case against the petitioners.

Considering the rival submissions, this Court is not inclined to allow the petitioners' prayer for grant of bail. The same is rejected.

This Court would expect that the petitioners' counsel would honour his undertaking in the instant proceedings regarding supply of the requisite court fee etc. within two weeks from the date he is called upon to do so by the office. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) PNM U T