Allowed

Rajesh Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC29 Nov 2016CR. MISC./39630/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail petition under Section 302/34 IPC arising from a murder case, the High Court of Judicature at Patna observed that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and no material existed to show his involvement except a confessional statement. The court granted bail.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each.

Rajesh Mukhiya Vs The State Of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.39630 of 2016

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -193 Year- 2015 Thana -BIHARIGANJ District- MADHEPURA ====================================================== 1. Rajesh Mukhiya, S/o Sundar Mukhiya, R/o Village- Mohanpur, Chamukh, P.S. Bihariganj, District- Madhepura. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. i Prem Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 3 29-11-2016 Heard both sides. The petitioner seeks bail in Bihariganj P.S. case No. 193 of 2015, corresponding to S.T. No. 90 of 2016, under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶3

The informant alleged that her husband was working in a hotel where he had quarrel with Binod Mukhiya. Binod Mukhiya and his friends might have killed her husband.

¶4

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR and on mere suspicion the petitioner has been arrested in the case. Binod Mukhiya has already been granted bail. The police obtained confessional statement of the petitioner. Save and except confessional statement of the petitioner, there is no material on record to show the

¶5

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39630 of 2016 (3) dt.29-11-2016

¶6

2/2

¶7

involvement of the petitioner. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner in pursuance of his confessional statement.

¶8

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation made against the petitioner, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Madhepura, in S.T. No. 90 of 2016, arising out of Bihariganj P.S. Case No. 193 of 2015.

¶9

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

¶10

BKS/-

¶11

U T

Rajesh Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mithlesh Ram and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Amarjeet Kumar @ Amarjeet Mahto Vs The State Of Bihar

Ratan Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Shashi Chaudhary @ Bholu Chaudhary Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Dharamendra Sah @ Dharmendra Sah and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Anil Kumar Sah Vs The State Of Bihar