← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./51682/2022rejected

Ram Niwash Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2023-02-14Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 51682 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2022 Thana- TEGHRHA District- Begusarai ====================================================== RAM NIWASH CHAUDHARY SON OF LATE DASHRATH CHAUDHARY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- DULARPUR NAYA NAGAR, P.S.- TEGHRA, DISTRICT- BEGUSARAI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sabal Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Gulnar Begum ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 14-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 364/34 of the Indian Penal Code and later on Sections 364, 302 and 347 of the IPC were further added.

As per allegation in the FIR, several accused persons including the petitioner have kidnapped two sons of the informant. It is further alleged that they have left his one son and killed another son.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case due to previous land dispute. There is no eye witness of the alleged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 51682 of 2022(4) dt.14-02-2023 2/2 occurrence. Both parties are next door neighbor. Except suspicion, no other consistent material has come during investigation to implicate the petitioner in the present case. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 23.04.2022. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submitted that during investigation several witnesses, in para 113, 118, 123 and 129 have supported the prosecution story.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U