Santosh Bharati @ Shivdhani Bharati @ Shidhni Bharti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37051 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2022 Thana- IMAMGANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== Santosh Bharati @ Shivdhani Bharati @ Shidhni Bharti Son Of Kishori Bharati Resident Of Village- Bhaghar, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Uday Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 23-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Let the defect(s), if any, as pointed out by the office, be removed within four weeks.

The case is registered under Section 436, 302 of IPC in connection with Imamganj P.S. Case No. 31 of 2022. As per the FIR, the informant has alleged that he had a fight with the petitioner who was in an intoxicated state and he had threatened to put the house on fire. In the middle of the night, they found the house to be set on fire. Anyhow, the elder son was taken out but the intensity of the fire was so much that they could not bring out another son who was burnt to death. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the informant was having illegal electric connection and that may

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37051 of 2022(2) dt.23-09-2022 2/2 be the reason for fire in the hut and as such the petitioner deserves bail.

Per contra, Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP submits that the fact that the police upon investigation found the case to be true and charge-sheet stands submitted under Section 302 of the IPC, the alibi put forward by the petitioner that he had not put the hut on fire and it was due to illegal electric connection, the hut got fire, be disbelieved.

Considering the fact that subsequent to the scuffle betweenthe informant and the petitioner during the local fair followed by his threatening, the fire broke out in hut causing death of an innocent child, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner which is accordingly rejected. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a period of one year. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/Ajay Singh U T