Patna High CourtCR. MISC./2765/2016rejected

Krishna Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2016-03-17Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2765 of 2016 (3) dt.17-03-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2765 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -204 Year- 2014 Thana -WARSALIGANJ District- NAWADA ======================================================

1. Krishna Chaudhary Son of Late Ramdhani Chaudhary, Resident of Village - Koeri Tola, Devi Asthan, P.S. Warisaliganj, District - Nawada. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pravin Kumar Gupta For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M.K. Nirala (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 17-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Warisaliganj P.S. Case No. 204 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, the petitioner told the husband of the informant to come to his house to take back Rs. 2,00,000/- and then the husband of the informant went with the petitioner to his house on 06.10.2014 at 11:00 am and at about 1:00 pm the husband of the informant was found lying dead in the house of the petitioner and the petitioner and his family members fled away. It is alleged that after administering acid and pouring acid the petitioner and his family members have killed the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2765 of 2016 (3) dt.17-03-2016 husband of the informant.

Submission is of false implication and that the deceased was a veteran drunker and he might have fallen down and received injuries, it is false to say that the petitioner called the husband of the informant in his house, in this case co-accused Akash @ Chhotu Choudhary has been allowed bail vide Cr. Misc. No. 17536 of 2015 and as such the petitioner also deserves sympathetic consideration to which learned APP opposes by submitting that the case of the petitioner is on different footing as the deceased went with the petitioner in his house to take back the amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- and thereafter, his dead body was found in the house of the petitioner.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner to be serious in nature, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected. However, considering the period of detention, let the trial of the petitioner be expedited.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T