Dharmendra Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50257 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-422 Year-2024 Thana- GURUA District- Gaya ====================================================== Dharmendra Chaudhary, Son of Late Umesh Chaudhary, Resident of village - Tandwa, Tanrwa, P.S.- Gurua, District - Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vishwa Ranjan Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. B.N. Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 16-10-2025 Heard Mr. Vishwa Ranjan Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.N. Pandey, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Gurua P.S. Case No.422 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with others has killed the husband of the informant by pressing his neck.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. From perusal of the F.I.R., it is clear that there is no one is eye witness of this case. It has also been submitted that from perusal of the postmortem report it will transpire that no external injury was found on the body of the deceased and viscera was preserved for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50257 of 2025(3) dt.16-10-2025 2/2 ascertaining the cause of death. It has also been submitted that during investigation, it has come that there was dispute between the petitioner and informant regarding some cash. It has also been submitted that in investigation, it has only come that there was some dispute between the petitioner and the deceased for irrigating the lands. There is no any direct evidence against the petitioner save and except the suspicion of the informant. It has also been submitted that petitioner is a differently abled person having disability of 45%. He is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 27.12.2024.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the application for bail.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sherghati, Gaya in connection with Gurua P.S. Case No. 422 of 2024.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T