Allowed

Ritesh Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC21 Sept 2022CR. MISC./28348/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous application for regular bail under sections 302, 201 and 34 IPC, the Patna High Court allowed the petitioner's bail after hearing counsel. The scope suggests he be enlarged on bail under specific conditions and bond amounts.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties of like amount each, subject to conditions of physical presence before the court below.

Ritesh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28348 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2022 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas

¶3

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

¶4

RITESH KUMAR S/o Faujdar Sah Resident of Village- Babhani, P.S.Kargahar, District- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kuber Pathak, Sanjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar For the Informant/s : Mr. Upadhyay Saurab Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 21-09-2022

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to

¶13

remove defect (s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks on resumption of physical mode.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

¶15

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under sections 302 and 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

As per the prosecution case, the informant's son was at his house in the meantime co-accused Niraj Kumar came and took away his son to village Babhani, where the informant's son, the co-accused Niraj Kumar and the petitioner Ritesh Kumar took food in the hut of one Paramhans Yadav. When the son of

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28348 of 2022(2) dt.21-09-2022 2/3

¶18

the informant did not return in the night then in the morning the informant and the villagers started searching his son. When they reached Babhani and inquired about his son then they saw that his son was drowned in the canal and had sustained injuries. It is further alleged that the informant has full confidence that the petitioner and the co-accused murdered his son and threw the dead body in the canal to conceal the evidence.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that there is specific allegation against the co-accused person for taking the deceased from his house. It is further stated that the real reason behind the occurrence is that the coaccused had taken Rs. 40,000/ from the deceased. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 20.01.2022.

¶20

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

¶21

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28348 of 2022(2) dt.21-09-2022 3/3

¶23

Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with karahgar P.S. Case No. 20 of 2022, with a condition :-

¶24

The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.

¶25

The application stands allowed.

¶26

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶27

atul/-

¶28

U T

Ritesh Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritesh Kumar 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

Shivpujan Mehta Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Paro Mandal @ Parmanand Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Noor Jahan Khatoon Vs the State of Bihar

Satendra Singh @ Satendra Narayan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Satyanarain Rajak @ Satyanarayan Rajak Vs the State of Bihar