Vinay Tanti @ Vinay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37257 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2022 Thana- DHARHARA District- Munger ====================================================== VINAY TANTI @ VINAY KUMAR Son of Late Bhushan Tanti Resident of Village- Pachrukhi, P.s.- Dharahra, Distt- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kumar Kamal Nayan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anant Kumar 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-09-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect (s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks on resumption of physical mode. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner informed the informant that the petitioner and the son of the informant were coming back to their house and on the way some miscreants surrounded and pushed them into the well and the petitioner managed to come out of the well and told the informant to go to rescue his son. On this information, the informant went to the well and the dead body of the informant's

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37257 of 2022(2) dt.28-09-2022 2/2 son was taken out of the well with the help of the villagers. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 05.03.2022.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that there is specific allegation against the petitioner to kill the informant's son by throwing him in the well. It is further submitted that the petitioner is an F.I.R named accused. After investigation the I.O. submitted charge-sheet under section 302 of the I.P.C against the petitioner.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as the specific allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge this petitioner above-named on bail. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within 9 months. The bail petition stands rejected.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) ayush/- U T