Anand Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56011 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2023 Thana- KATHAIYA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Anand Pandey S/O Late Shivnath Pandey R/O Village-Jasauli,P.S.-Kathaiya, Distt-Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-09-2024 Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 01.04.2023, in connection with S. Tr. No. 555 of 2023 arising out of Kathaiya P.S. Case No. 42 of 2023, FIR dated 31.03.2023 registered for the offence under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the informant has been killed by the petitioner and other co-accused persons.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who is of clean antecedent, is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case merely on the ground that the petitioner is husband of the deceased. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56011 of 2024(3) dt.25-09-2024 2/2 and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He further submits that co-accused person, namely, Ashutosh Kumar @ Ashutosh Pandey, against whom the allegation that he has assaulted to the deceased, has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.02.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 11052 of 2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the statement of one Anushka Kumari has been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has categorically stated that with a common intention the petitioner and other co-accused persons have committed the murder of the deceased, Anushka Kumari is daughter of the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with S. Tr. No. 555 of 2023 arising out of Kathaiya P.S. Case No. 42 of 2023 pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-X, Muzaffarpur.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) ajay/- U T