Chintu Mandal v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46575 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-253 Year-2023 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger ====================================================== Chintu Mandal Son Of Anil Mandal Resident Of Maniyarchak, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Surya Narayan Sah, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 24-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 253 of 2023, lodged on 14.07.2023, under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against three named accused persons including the present petitioner. The dead body of the informant's husband was found and on suspicion, the name of three accused persons including the present petitioner has been inserted in the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46575 of 2024(2) dt.24-07-2024 2/3 the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he is in custody since 14.07.2023. Counsel submits that the worst part which has come in the rejection order is that the petitioner was seen in the CCTV footage and certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act has also been submitted by the police in support of identification of the petitioner in commission of the crime. But he submits that the petitioner has not been seen committing the crime rather it has been seen that he was going through public way and therefore he submits that only and only on the basis of suspicion petitioner is in custody.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that prayer for bail of co-accused has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 29.05.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.12498 of 2024.
6. In this background, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is refused with liberty granted to the petitioner that after 12 months the petitioner shall move for bail before the trial Court itself and if the trial is not concluded within 12 months, in that case it is directed to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46575 of 2024(2) dt.24-07-2024 3/3 trial Court to release him on bail on the condition so that he may not evade his appearance further.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Mkr./- U T