Mithilesh Tatma @ Bouka v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72342 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2021 Thana- SIKTI District- Araria ====================================================== 1.

MITHILESH TATMA @ BOUKA Son of Nandu Tatma Resident of VillagePothiya, Ward No.-10, P.S.- Sikty (Bardaha), District- Araria 2.

MANOJ KUMAR TATMA @ MANOJ TATMA Son of Baijnathi Tatma @ Baidhnathi Tatma Resident of Village- Pothiya, Ward No.-10, P.S.- Sikty (Bardaha), District- Araria 3.

SANTOSH TATMA @ SANTOSH K. TATMA Son of Sri Prasad Tatma Resident of Village- Pipra, P.S.- Sikty (Bardaha), District- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Raj Kishor Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 10-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 120(B) of the I.P.C. As per allegation in the FIR, marriage of informant's daughter was solemnized 13 years back with Prakash Tatma and out of the said wedlock, they were blessed with three children. On 23.09.2021 informant found her daughter missing from her matrimonial home and during search she came to know that dead body of her daughter was lying in water lobbed ditch and she was being killed by sharp cut heavy weapon. Informant raised strong suspicion against these petitioners.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72342 of 2022(3) dt.10-04-2023 2/2 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. All the petitioners are brother-in-law of the deceased (nandoshi). Only on the basis of suspicion, name of the petitioners have been surfaced in the present case. No one is the eye witness of the alleged occurrence. During investigation, no consistent evidence has come against the petitioners to show their involvement in the present case. All the petitioners are languishing in judicial custody for more than six months.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Araria in connection with Sikty (Bardaha) P.S. Case No. 190 of 2021.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U