Vijay Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18753 of 2016 (4) dt.29-06-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18753 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -116 Year- 2015 Thana -DULHIN BAZAR District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Vijay Manjhi S/o Late Bhola Manjhi, Resident of Village - Aain Khan, P.S. - Dulhin Bazar, District - Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s Mr. Rakesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s Mr. Indu Kri.Srivastava(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 29-06-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 116 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. A dead body was seen in the water near the field of Raghubanshi Mahto and thereafter the informant who is Chaukidar informed the police officials and in presence of police officials dead body was taken out from the water which was of unknown female. During investigation, it transpired that the dead body was of the daughter of the petitioner and she was having love affair with Guddu Manjhi which was being opposed by the petitioner, resulting the petitioner killed his daughter and threw

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18753 of 2016 (4) dt.29-06-2016 her dead body and thereafter, fled away from the house and after his arrest he confessed his guilt also.

Submission is of false implication and that besides suspicion there is nothing against the petitioner, there is no legal and tangible material against him and he is suffering in custody since 04.01.2016 to which the learned A.P.P. opposes by submitting that against the petitioner there is strong circumstantial evidence as he, being the father of the deceased, did not inform regarding the death of his daughter to any one and fled away and further the witnesses vide para 43, 44, 45 and 54 have stated regarding the hand of the petitioner.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the materials collected during investigation, at present I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected in connection with Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 116 of 2015 pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M., Danapur.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) sushma/- U T