Devendra Singh @ Tuntun Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70964 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2024 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Devendra Singh @ Tuntun Singh, Son of Dukhit Singh, Resident of VillageArniya, Ward No.11, P.S. - Jandaha, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Yugal Kishore, Advocate Ms. Rupa Kumari, APP For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Hemant Ray, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-10-2024 Heard Mr. Yugal Kishore, learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. The informant suo motu appears through Mr. Hemant Ray, learned Advocate

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody in connection with Jandaha P.S. Case No. 116 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 365 of the Indian Penal Code. Later on, Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code have been added.

3. Based upon the written report, the prosecution alleges that the younger son of the informant, aged about eight years, was found traceless since morning and despite every efforts when his whereabouts could not be traced, the present F.I.R. has been instituted apprehending the involvement of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70964 of 2024(2) dt.04-10-2024 2/3 F.I.R. named accused persons, on account of land dispute and threatening meted to the informant prior to the occurrence.

4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that the F.I.R. has been instituted against four named accused persons against whom there was a land dispute. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., however, during the course of investigation, the police apprehended one Satish Kumar @ Lolu and on whose disclosure the police apprehended the petitioner and his wife. The wife of the petitioner, namely, Puja Kumari, has been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 59761 of 2024 vide order dated 28.08.2024. It is next contended that though it has come during the course of investigation that on the disclosure made by this petitioner, the dead body of son of the informant, aged about 8 years, was recovered, but there is no evidence on the point of causing death of the boy. It is lastly contended that now the investigation is complete and chargesheet has been submitted.

5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State as well as learned Advocate for the informant vehemently oppose the bail application and submit that on the basis of confession made by the petitioner, the dead body of the son of the informant has been recovered. The petitioner in his confessional statement

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70964 of 2024(2) dt.04-10-2024 3/3 narrated the entire incidence as to how he committed the crime.

6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the confession of the petitioner, leading to recovery of the dead body of the son of the informant, coupled with the other cogent material, which has collected during the course of investigation, this Court is not acceded to the prayer made by the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Harish Kumar, J) uday/- U T