Partly allowed

Santosh Patel @ Santosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC25 Apr 2022CR. MISC./66812/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On April 25, 2022, a Patna High Court judge heard two criminal miscellaneous petitions for regular bail in a case involving assault and death. The court rejected the bail application for Santosh Patel due to direct allegations against him. Conversely, it granted bail to Harendra Chaudhary based on the lack of direct evidence against him.

What did the court decide?

Bail rejected for Santosh Patel; granted for Harendra Chaudhary on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties of Rs 10,000 each before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bagaha.

Santosh Patel @ Santosh 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.65828 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-361 Year-2021 Thana- BAGHA District- West Champaran

¶3

====================================================== HARENDRA CHAUDHARY @ HARENDRA PATEL SON OF LATE ASRAFI PATEL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BAITHWALIYA POLICE STATION - BHAIROGANJ DISTRICT- WEST CHAMPARAN

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

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

¶9

with

¶10

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 66812 of 2021

¶11

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-361 Year-2021 Thana- BAGHA District- West Champaran

¶12

====================================================== SANTOSH PATEL @ SANTOSH KUMAR Son of Mahendra Patel Resident of Village- Baithwaliya, P.S.- Bhairoganj, District- West Champaran.

¶13

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 65828 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sachida Nand Rai, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh no.1, Adv. (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 66812 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sachida Nand Rai, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶14

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶15

2 25-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under section 307 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code to which section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added subsequently.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65828 of 2021(2) dt.25-04-2022 2/3

¶18

As per the prosecution case, the four named accused persons are said to have come variously armed. It is further stated that on the orders of Satya Narayan Patel, Santosh Patel assaulted with a lathi on the head of the father of the informant who died five days later in course of treatment.

¶19

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. Accepting the allegations in the F.I.R., the allegation of overt act is only against Santosh Patel and not others. Further even in course of investigation, material has transpired to the effect that assault by Santosh Patel is not the sole cause of death of the deceased. The petitioners are in custody since 14.7.2021 and 24.8.2021 respectively. Chargesheet has been submitted in the case.

¶20

The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant. It is submitted by learned counsel for the informant that besides the allegations in the F.I.R. against Santosh Patel it has also transpired in course of investigation that Harendra Patel also assaulted the father of the informant on his head which is supported from the contents of the post-mortem report.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65828 of 2021(2) dt.25-04-2022 3/3

¶23

taking into consideration the direct allegation against Santosh Patel of having assaulted the father of the informant with a lathi which is supported from the contents of the post-mortem report, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner (Santosh Patel @ Santosh Kumar) on bail and the application is rejected.

¶24

Liberty is granted to Santosh Patel to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

¶25

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record, the allegation of assault on the father of the informant being solely against Santosh Patel and not Harendra Chaudhary @ Harendra Patel, the Court directs the petitioner Harendra Chaudhary @ Harendra Patel to be enlarged on bail in connection with Bagaha Bhairoganj P.S. Case no.361 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 1^st , Bagaha, District West Champaran.

¶26

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶27

Saurabh/-

Santosh Patel @ Santosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Patel @ Santosh 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

Ashok Mahto Vs the State of Bihar

Subodh Kumar Singh @ Subodh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajaram Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Hari Bansh Singh @ Harivansh Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar