Chaitu Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80150 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-208 Year-2023 Thana- DULHIN BAZAR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Chaitu Choudhary Son of Kirodhana Choudhary Resident of Kazi Mahalla, P.S- Maner, District- Patna 2.

Shiv Kmar Choudhary @ Shiv Choudhary @ Shiv Kumar Chauhan Son of Jamurat Choudhary Resident of Kazi Mahalla, P.S- Maner, District- Patna ... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners :

Mr.Amit Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr.Shantanu Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, informant suspects that all the FIR named accused persons including these petitioners killed her husband due to previous enmity.

4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that informant is not eye witness of the occurrence and only on suspicion petitioners have falsely been implicated because of previous dispute. From perusal of the First Information Report itself it is clear that the informant has admitted that her husband, on the spur of moment, after an altercation with the informant, left his house situated in Maner and after sometime information was received that his dead body was found hanging on the tree in his village Sherpur. Learned counsel submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80150 of 2024(3) dt.27-01-2025 2/2 the husband of informant might have committed suicide in an inebriated condition since he was fed up with the day to day behaviour of his wife. Learned counsel submits that save and except suspicion, there is no other direct or indirect evidence against these petitioners to show their complicity in the occurrence. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, prayer for bail of all the petitioners is allowed. In the event of arrest/surrender within eight weeks from today, let these petitioners, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Danapur Patna in Dulhin Bazar Police Station Case No. 208 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T