Bhikhari Patel v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.58765 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -198 Year- 2017 Thana -CHANPATIA DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Bhikhari Patel Son of late Rudal Raut Resident of Village- Kumarbag, P.S. Chanpatia, District- West Champaran.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
The petitioner is in custody in connection with Chanpatia P.S. Case No.198 of 2017, a case under Sections 302, 201 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
The petitioner is father-in-law of Shantara Devi, the daughter of the informant. The allegation is that from very beginning, the petitioner and his family members wanted to grab the land of petitioner, therefore, they were pressurizing for execution of transfer deed, for the reason that informant had no son. In the aforesaid background, the petitioner and others allegedly assaulted to the wife of informant and taken away to Shantara Devi from the house. Thereafter murder of Shantara Devi
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.58765 of 2017 (4) dt.06-02-2018 2/2 was committed. The dead body of the wife of informant was also noticed hanging in the room. The postmortem report of the wife of informant reveals that the death was not due to throttling or hanging rather injuries sustained by hard and blunt substance on other part of body. There is no eyewitness, who has seen any of the occurrence either commission of murder of wife of informant or the daughter of informant, only hearsay witnesses were before the police.
Learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail on the basis of aforesaid material available in the case diary.
Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court-below where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case, with condition that the petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation/trial of the case, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner.
(Birendra Kumar, J.) Amit/- U T