Ravindra Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55807 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-261 Year-2020 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna ====================================================== Ravindra Manjhi, S/O - Sadhu Manjhi @ Sanju Manjhi, R/o - Sonachak, P.SGaurichak, Distt.- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajit Ranjan Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Anamika, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Binod Kumar No. 3, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-09-2024
1. Heard Mr. Ajit Ranjan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Binod Kumar No. 3, learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with S.Tr. No. 579 of 2023 corresponding to Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 261 of 2020 dated 25.08.2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 308 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the second attempt of the petitioner to get the relief of regular bail as his earlier bail prayer was rejected by this Bench vide order dated 17.02.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 47006/2022 and petitioner has again come before this Court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55807 of 2024(4) dt.20-09-2024 2/3 mainly on the ground of his custody period which has been about three years, and also, no progress in his trial as till date only two prosecution witnesses out of eight have been examined and both the witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. It is further submitted that the deceased who happened to be the wife of this petitioner sustained burn injuries accidentally and the petitioner's father admitted the deceased at the hospital concerned and the petitioner was not present at that time in his house and he was outside for the purpose of his livelihood.
Learned counsel further submits that the informant, who happens to be the father-in-law of the petitioner, made allegation mainly on the basis of getting an information regarding the alleged act of the petitioner from his daughter (deceased) when she was alive but the said fact is not believable as according to the discharge summary issued by Vardhaman Institute of Medical Sciences Hospital, Pawapuri, Nalanda, Bihar where the deceased was initially treated, there were 99% burn injuries to the deceased, so in such a situation, it is not believable that the deceased was capable to say something at the relevant time.
4. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55807 of 2024(4) dt.20-09-2024 3/3
5. Having considered the petitioner's custody period which has been about three years, and the slowness of the prosecution in producing the prosecution witnesses, and also, taking into account the petitioner's family background, this Court is now inclined to release him on bail. Accordingly, let the petitioner named-above be enlarged 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 Court concerned in connection with S.Tr. No. 579 of 2023 corresponding to Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 261 of 2020.
(Shailendra Singh, J) annu/- U T