Bhagwan Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88134 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-380 Year-2024 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.
Bhagwan Singh, Son of Late Rajballabh Singh 2.
Komal Kumari, W/O Amarjeet Kumar, D/O Bhawan Singh Both are R/O Village- Akuraha, P.S- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Nachiketa Jha, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned APP for the State and Mr. Anuj Kumar, learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioners have prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238, 61 and 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the informant and her husband Ritesh Kumar resided at Muzaffarpur for the studies of their daughter. It has further been alleged that the petitioners along with others have killed the husband of the informant. It has further been stated that Komal Kumari, petitioner No.2 was having illicit relationship with Sanjeev Singh which was being objected by the deceased Ritesh Kumar.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88134 of 2024(4) dt.17-02-2025 2/3 It is alleged that due to this the husband of the informant has been killed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioner No.1, Bhagwan Singh has informed the informant regarding the occurrence and he is father of the deceased. There is no motive that the petitioner No.1 will kill his own son. As far as petitioner No.2 is concerned, if at all taken to be true that she was having illicit relation with Sanjeev Singh, then also what is her motive in killing Ritesh Kumar. During investigation witnesses have stated that they have heard regarding the occurrence. There is no eye-witness. Learned counsel further submits that all the witnesses are from the naihar family of the informant. No local witness has been examined. The petitioners are having clean antecedent and they are in jail since 27.07.2024.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the Informant.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the above facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each of them with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88134 of 2024(4) dt.17-02-2025 3/3 two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned A.C.J.M.- 3rd (West), Muzaffarpur in connection with Kanti P.S. Case No. 380 of 2024.
7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands allowed.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) durgesh/- U T