Jitendra Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33609 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-502 Year-2021 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya ====================================================== JITENDRA DAS S/o Late Sukhdeo Ravidas R/o village- Bagahi Khurd, P.S.- Bodh Gaya, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 23-01-2023 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 Bodh Gaya P.S. Case No. 502 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per prosecution case, it is alleged that by hatching conspiracy petitioner and others committed the murder of informant's husband. It is further alleged that deceased has illicit relation with the petitioner's daughter. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 19.12.2021 and bears no criminal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33609 of 2022(3) dt.23-01-2023 2/3 antecedent. Charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. He further submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case as he is father of co-accused Gudiya Kumari. He further submits that there is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence. Except suspicion, there is nothing on record to demonstrate the complicity of petitioner with the alleged occurrence. He further submits that it is alleged that petitioner's daughter called the deceased on mobile but no mobile number of the petitioner's daughter has been mentioned in the FIR. He further submits that neither any circumstantial evidence nor any iota of other evidence is available against the present petitioner. The learned A.P.P.

for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioner, charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33609 of 2022(3) dt.23-01-2023 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in connection with Bodh Gaya P.S. Case No. 502 of 2021, subject to following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself. (iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

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