Jagmohan Azad @ Ravish Singh @ Ravish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2243 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2019 Thana- TARAPUR District- Munger ====================================================== Jagmohan Azad @ Ravish Singh @ Ravish Kumar aged about 26 years, (Male) son of late Horil Azad, Resident of village- Launa, Police Station Tarapur, District- Munger.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opp Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Undu Bhushan Advocate For the State :
Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 14-07-2021 In view of the sudden resurgence of Covid-19 infection, there is limited functioning of the High Court and, therefore, the matter has been listed today for consideration through virtual mode.
2 Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected to honour his undertaking given in the instant case for depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defects as pointed out by office when called upon to do so by the office.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State
4. The petitioner seeks bail in Tarapur PS Case No 96 of 2019, instituted for the offence under Sections 304B and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
5. Being husband of the victim, the petitioner is accused of the offence punishable under Sections 304B and 201/34 of the IPC.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is a case of false implication. The FIR has been lodged on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2243 of 2021(5) dt.14-07-2021 2/3 07.07.2019, whereas the alleged occurrence has taken place on 06.07.2019. The only lame excuse for the delay of one day that has been stated is that for this one day the informant ( mother of the victim) was enquiring for her daughter.
7. The case diary had earlier been called for. Referring to the depositions of the witnesses, in the course of investigation, contained in paragraph Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8, it is stated that the villagers have consistently stated that the petitioner was earning his livelihood in Chennai. The victim was employed in school and had developed relations with some person and, based on such dispute, the petitioner and the victim were earlier quarreling in a routine manner on various occasions. Recently, the petitioner had expressed desire to take the victim along with him to Chennai and, in this process, quarrel has taken place again, and as such, the victim has committed suicide. They have all stated about the mother-in-law, being an old lady aged about 70 years and, therefore, the allegation of ill- treatment against the mother-in-law towards the victim was also false. Under such circumstances, the petitioner is stated to be in custody since 13.08.2020.
8. The learned APP representing the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
9. Considering the rival submissions, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM IV Munger, in connection with Tarapur PS Case No 96 of 2019, subject to the following conditions:- (i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2243 of 2021(5) dt.14-07-2021 3/3 he is related with the petitioner. The bailor will also undertake to inform the Court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner.
(ii) That the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail bond will be liable to be cancelled.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J) shyambihari/- U T