Lalan Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80967 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2023 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran ====================================================== Lalan Ray S/o Yodha Ray R/o Aloni Tola, P.O. - Garkha, P.S. - Garkha, Distt.- Saran, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Puneet Siddhartha, Advocate Mr. Aryan Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 28-04-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection with Garkha P.S. Case no.133 of 2023, registered under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the informant had not returned to house after she went out to get water and subsequently her dead body was found 50 meters away from her house. The petitioner was the informant of the present case and he named eight persons as accused on the basis of suspicion. However, during investigation it transpired that it was the petitioner who contacted one Manoj Ray for the purpose of killing the deceased and it would appear from the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80967 of 2024(7) dt.28-04-2025 2/3 confessional statement of said Manoj Ray that the murder was planned together with the petitioner. The family members of the petitioner also participated in the said offence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The name of the petitioner subsequently came during course of investigation in the confessional statement of co-accused Manoj Ray and besides his statement, there is no other material against him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similarly situated co-accused Sonu Kumar has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail vide order dated 17.05.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6637 of 2024. He further submits that accused Manoj Ray has also been granted regualr bail by this Court vide order dated 08.02.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 82361 of 2023 on whose confession the name of the petitioner transpired.
5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State on the ground that it is a case of honour killing where an innocent girl had been killed by the petitioner and other members of the family. It has also been submitted that the main role has been attributed to this petitioner who had contacted co-accused Manoj Ray and had planned the murder of the deceased which would be evident from paragraph
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80967 of 2024(7) dt.28-04-2025 3/3 nos. 71 to 74 of the case diary.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record, the case of the accused Sonu Kumar who has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail is distinguishable from that of present petitioner as the petitioner is the father of deceased girl and the allegation against him is that he contacted co-accused Manoj Ray and made the entire plan for killing of the deceased.
8. Taking into consideration the fact that matter relates to causing death of a girl on account of honour killing done by the father and the family members of the deceased along with co-accused Manoj Ray, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail and the application is rejected.
9. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) Harsh/- U T