Prashant Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32804 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2021 Thana- MANSURCHAK District- Begusarai ====================================================== PRASHANT KUMAR JHA Son of Dewanand Jha Resident of Village - Ward No.11, Garai Gaon, Govindpur, P.s.- Mansoorchak, Distt.- Begusarai, Bihar851128 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Apurv Harsh (Adv.) :

Manu Tripurari (Adv.) :

Sujit Kumar (Adv.) :

Prashant Bhardwaj (Adv.) :

Mahima Sharma (Adv.) For the informant :

Yugal Kishore (Adv.) For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nitya Nand Tiwary (A.P.P.) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 16-01-2023 Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mansoorchak P.S. Case No. 124 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per prosecution case, the informant got information that petitioner alongwith other accused persons concertedly committed murder of informant's daughter by

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32804 of 2022(4) dt.16-01-2023 2/3 burning. When she enquired about the same, she found the said fact true.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 05.03.2022. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

The learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently oppose the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submit that the informant got the information that her daughter has been killed by burning. When she enquired the same, she finds that the information is true and there is allegation that petitioner is one of the accused persons who participated in setting the victim on fire and re-statement of informant has asserted the facts of F.I.R. and in para 3 of the case diary witness namely Ramagya Chaudhari has also supported the prosecution case. Learned counsels further submit that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32804 of 2022(4) dt.16-01-2023 3/3 inclined to grant bail to the present petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the present petitioner stands rejected. However, if the trial is not concluded within six months from the date of receipt of this order, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) amitkr/- U T