Patna High Court
Dinesh Chaudhary vs The State Of Bihar on 7 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 28473 of 2020
Arising Out of PS Case No.-57 Year-2019 Thana- BAGAHA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Dinesh Chaudhary, Male, aged about 26 years, Son of Chhotelal @ Chhotelal
Chaudhary, Resident of Village-Chhitauni, Tengraha Chak No.4, PS-
Hanumanganj, District-Kushi Nagar (UP), At present address resident of
Village-Pakargawn, PS-Bagaha, District-West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prashant Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN
AMANULLAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 07-04-2021
The matter has been heard via video conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. Prashant Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the
State.
3. The petitioner is in custody in connection with
Bagaha PS Case No. 57 of 2019 dated 01.02.2019, instituted
under Section 364 and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. This is the second attempt for bail by the petitioner as
earlier such prayer was rejected by order dated 11.12.2019 passed
in Cr. Misc. No. 45508 of 2019.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28473 of 2020 dt.07-04-2021
5. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was
running a tempo belonging to the deceased and the deceased had
gone to collect money from him on 28.01.2019 and later his body
was recovered.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that only
on suspicion he has been made an accused and he had no motive
for committing the crime as he was earning his livelihood from
the tempo owned by the deceased and was paying him for the
same. It was submitted that the petitioner is in custody since
04.02.2019 i.e., for more than two years.
7. Learned APP submitted that the Court has considered
the merits on 11.12.2019 and had rejected the same. However, by
way of reiteration, it was submitted that the body of the deceased
was recovered and his neck was cut i.e., the mode of doing him to
death was heinous. It was submitted that there was strong motive
for the petitioner to commit the crime as he used to give money to
the deceased for running his tempo and the petitioner had called
the deceased to give him money on 28.01.2019 and since then he
went missing and most importantly, during investigation, it has
been found that the call detail record shows numerous calls
between the deceased and the petitioner on 27.01.2019 and
28.01.2019 i.e., on the day on which he had gone missing and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28473 of 2020 dt.07-04-2021
there is a strong motive also. It was submitted that a period of two
years of incarceration, in the facts and circumstances of the case
and a strong finger of suspicion pointing directly towards the
petitioner, was not sufficient to grant indulgence to the petitioner.
8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the
case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court
is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
9. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
10. However, the Court below shall expedite the trial.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)
P. Kumar
AFR/NAFR
U
T
