Rajendra Sharma @ Rajendra Mistry v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33881 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2020 Thana- GURARU District- Gaya ====================================================== Rajendra Sharma @ Rajendra Mistry son of Late Nathuni Mistry @ Nathun Mistry Village- Brorah, Police Station -Guraru, District -Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Aryan Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 27-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner makes a prayer for grant of regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 326, 307, 323 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, all the accused persons including the petitioner quarreled with the informant's husband for a share in the property and in the meantime, all the accused persons poured kerosene oil on her husband and put him on fire causing burn injury.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits at the outset that the FIR has been lodged after due thought and deliberation. As a matter of fact, the deceased has committed suicide due to the dispute in the family and the petitioner and informant's family are related to each other and there is partition

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33881 of 2025(2) dt.27-05-2025 2/2 dispute in between both the family. It has also been submitted that initially, the case was lodged under section 307 of the IPC but subsequently, the case has been found true under section 306/34 of the IPC which fact would be evident from the bail rejection order as reference to paragraph- 46 of the case diary has been made in the said order. It has also been stated that the deceased has died due to burn and its complications and the petitioner is in custody since 20.02.2025.

5. The learned APP opposes the prayer for bail on the ground that petitioner has one more criminal antecedent, however, it is submitted that in which he is on bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and also considering the fact that there is a dispute in the family and the case has been found true under section 306 of the IPC, let the above named petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand)with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/ successor court in Guraru P.S. Case No.59 of 2020.

N.K/- (Soni Shrivastava, J) U T