Sandeep Kumar vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4777 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36535 of 2020
      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2019 Thana- NAYAGAON District- Saran
======================================================

Sandeep Kumar, aged approx 30 years, Male, son of Sri Roopjitan Sah @ Roopjitan Prasad, resident of Village- Bariyarchak, P.S.- Nayagaon, District Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate
For the State            :       Mr. Anant Kumar No. 1, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 23-09-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for

the petitioner and Mr. Anant Kumar No. 1, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the

State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Nayagaon PS Case No. 116 of 2019 dated 19.08.2019, instituted

under Sections 304-B and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The allegation against the petitioner, who is the

husband of the daughter of the informant, is that he had killed

his wife and had also done away with evidence.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

during investigation it has come that the daughter of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36535 of 2020 dt.23-09-2021

informant had run away, as letter to this effect has been found

by the police. It was submitted that the dead body has not been

recovered. He submitted that the petitioner having clean

antecedent is a simple man working in Patna whereas the

incident is said to have taken place in the district of Saran.

6. On the aforesaid stand of learned counsel for the

petitioner, the Court had asked learned APP to obtain the up-to-

date legible photo copy of the entire case diary of Nayagaon PS

Case No. 116 of 2019 from the Superintendent of Police, Saran,

and later a report from the Forensic Science Laboratory with

regard to whether the letter found to have been written by the

wife of the petitioner was actually in her handwriting. Today,

learned APP has forwarded the report of the Superintendent of

Police, Saran, including the opinion of the police

laboratory/CID, Bihar, with regard to handwriting of the letter

recovered stating that the wife of the petitioner had herself gone

away. The report stated that it was in the same handwriting as

that of the other such writings of the wife of the petitioner,

which have been forwarded for comparison i.e., both the

disputed and specimen writings have been found to be of one

and the same person. Learned counsel for the petitioner

submitted that the informant has also filed compromise petition Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36535 of 2020 dt.23-09-2021

stating that the case has been filed due to misconception and

that even the witnesses during police investigation have stated

that the wife of the petitioner herself had gone away.

7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in

view of what has come during investigation as also the

comparison of the letter said to have been written by the victim

that she herself was leaving the house and the writing having

been found to be of her after comparison of the specimen

writings, the Court is inclined to allow the prayer for pre-arrest

bail.

8. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender

before the Court below within six weeks from today, the

petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.

25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like

amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief

Judicial Magistrate, VI, Chapra, Saran, in Nayagaon PS Case

No. 116 of 2019, subject to the conditions laid down in Section

438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and further (i)

that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner

and (ii) that the petitioner shall cooperate with the Court and

police/prosecution. Failure to co-operate shall lead to Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36535 of 2020 dt.23-09-2021

cancellation of his bail bonds.

9. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring

any violation of the foregoing conditions by the petitioner, to the

notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate

action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner.

10. The petition stands disposed of in the

aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

J. Alam/-

AFR/NAFR U T