Dismissed

Sharfaraj Khan @ Bhanu Khan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC3 Jun 2020CR. MISC./5392/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Miscellaneous applications for regular bail filed by two accused persons in a case alleging rape and murder, the Patna High Court rejected the prayer for bail. The Court noted that the FIR was lodged by the deceased's father and an eyewitness statement implicated the accused in strangled murder, rendering the evidence reliable despite allegations of tutored statements and delay. Accord

What did the court decide?

Application for regular bail dismissed; liberty to renew prayer for bail after one year if trial shows no progress.

Sharfaraj Khan @ Bhanu Khan Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5392 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-376 Year-2019 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran

¶3

====================================================== SARFARAJ KHAN @ BHANU KHAN, S/o Kaluth Khan, Resident of Village- Narkardei, P.S.- Sugaui, Distt- East Champaran

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

======================================================

¶9

with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6546 of 2020

¶10

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-376 Year-2019 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran

¶11

====================================================== TABREJ KHAN @ AFATAB KHAN, S/o Lalmahand Khan, Resident of Village- Narkardei, P.S.- Sugaui, Distt- East Champaran

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶16

======================================================

¶17

Appearance : (IN BOTH CASES) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Patanjali Rishi For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad ======================================================

¶18

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶19

3 03-06-2020

¶20

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, through video conferencing.

¶21

The petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Sugauli Police Station Case No. 376 of 2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14559 of 2020(3) dt.03-06-2020 2/4

¶23

The allegation against the petitioners is that in the night of 05.09.2019, the petitioners entered into the house of the deceased (daughter of the informant), where she was sleeping along with her four children, and finding her alone, the accused persons forced themselves in order to commit illicit relationship with her. Upon hulla, children of the deceased woke up and when the deceased resisted the petitioners, they strangulated her with her own scarf (dupatta) and fled away.

¶24

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence in the manner alleged. He further submits that on the basis of the confessional statement of the petitioner Tabrej Khan (paragraph 68 of the case diary), the petitioner Sharfaraj Khan has been implicated in this case. He submits that nobody from the family member (In-laws of the deceased) has lodged the First Information Report and it was the father of the deceased who has lodged the First Information Report after arriving at the place of occurrence from his village. He further submits that the statement of the son of the deceased, on whose information, the informant has lodged the present First Information Report, was not recorded by the police immediately after the occurrence; rather, it has been recorded by

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14559 of 2020(3) dt.03-06-2020 3/4

¶26

the police after lapse of 59 days. He, thus, submits that the statement of the son of the deceased is tutored and cannot be relied upon.

¶27

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the earliest version of the incident was informed to the police by the informant on the basis of the description of the incident given by the son of the deceased immediately after the occurrence and the son of the deceased has made the same statement before the police, which has been recorded in paragraph 87 of the case diary, in which the son of the deceased has categorically stated that the petitioners have committed the murder of his mother by strangulating her by means of her scarf (dupatta). He further submits that the confessional statement made by the petitioner Tabrej Khan is supported by the statement made by the son of the deceased, who is an eyewitness to the occurrence.

¶28

After having heard learned Counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials available on record and the fact that the petitioners are named in the First Information Report and the son of the deceased has made statement, recorded in paragraph 87 of the case diary, that the petitioners

¶29

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14559 of 2020(3) dt.03-06-2020 4/4

¶30

have committed the murder of his mother, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioners.

¶31

These applications are, accordingly, dismissed.

¶32

However, the petitioners may renew his prayer for bail after one year from today if the trial does not show any progress.

¶33

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)

¶34

Prabhakar Anand/-

¶35

U √ T √

Sharfaraj Khan @ Bhanu Khan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharfaraj Khan @ Bhanu Khan 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

Sanjay Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Vinod Mahton @ Vinod Mahto @ Binod Mahto Vs the State of Bihar

Vivek Kumar @ Karu Vs The State of Bihar

Mahavir Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Tabrej Khan @ Afatab Khan Vs the State of Bihar

Md. Sah Jahan Vs the State of Bihar