← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./65525/2019rejected

Lalit Pandit v. The State Of Bihar

2019-12-18Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65525 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-241 Year-2018 Thana- BABUBARHI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Lalit Pandit Son of Late Mishri Pandit Resident of Village- Kulharia, Police Station- Babubarhi, District- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Chandra Bhushan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is languishing in custody for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Babubarhi P.S. Case No. 241 of 2018, corresponding to C.R.I. No. 2314 of 2018.

The wife of the petitioner lodged the FIR alleging therein that the petitioner committed murder of his daughter aged about 14 years as daughter was seen in the house of Pintu Rai. Thus, the allegation is of honour killing. Submission is that the informant is not an eyewitness of the occurrence nor the case-diary would reveal that any other person had seen the alleged occurrence. Only suspicion is there. The petitioner is in custody since 05.04.2019. The case-diary

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65525 of 2019(4) dt.18-12-2019 2/2 would reveal that witnesses stated before the police that they heard that the petitioner was assaulting to the victim in his own house. As a result whereof the victim died. The people nearby rushed to the house of the petitioner and saw the dead body of the victim.

Considering the nature of allegation and material against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, the prayer for bail is refused. The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within nine months. (Birendra Kumar, J) Mkr./- U T