Vikash Kumar Rai @ Vikash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74778 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2015 Thana- UJIYARPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Vikash Kumar Rai @ Vikash Kumar, S/o late Ramprit Rai, Resident of Village- Mahisari, P.S. Ujiarpur, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr.Tej Narayan Singh, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Kanhaiya Kishore, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is languishing in custody since 16.03.2018 in a case for the offence registered under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the IPC.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the informant had married his niece Priyanka Kumari with Pramod Rai on 18.05.2009, but Pramod Rai and his father used to assault her after two months of her marriage. Priyanka Kumari (Devi) married herself with cousin Dever Vikash Kumar Rai (petitioner). On 13.01.2015. the complainant received information that Vikash Kumar Rai (petitioner) and his father and mother Chando Devi assaulted Priyanka Kumari on which

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74778 of 2018(5) dt.11-04-2019 2/3 he went to Village Mahisari, he saw that the accused persons including this petitioner tonsuring, and that Ajit Rai and Rajendra Rai gave information that on the night of 06.01.2015, the accused persons have killed Priyanka Kumari and have made the dead body traceless.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence nor there is any circumstantial evidence to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present case.

On behalf of the learned counsel for the State, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R/ complaint case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J. 3rd,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74778 of 2018(5) dt.11-04-2019 3/3 Samastipur, in connection with Ujiarpur P.S. Case No. 28 of 2015.

(Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./- U T