Allowed

Balram Swarnkar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC20 Jul 2022CR. MISC./6958/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under CrPC regarding murder charges (IPC 302/34), the Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner. The Court noted the trial had exceeded the initial nine-month adjournment period. Finding prima facie evidence weak due to lack of external injuries and no eyewitness, the Court allowed bail with conditions and a bond of Rs. 10,000.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on execution of a P.R. bond of Rs.10,000 and furnishing surety of the like amount under specified conditions.

Balram Swarnkar Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6958 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-338 Year-2020 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura

¶3

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

¶4

BALRAM SWARNKAR SON OF LATE SIBAN SWARNKAR R/O VILLAGE- BARAHI, WARD NO.6, P.S.- MADHEPURA, DISTRICTMADHEPURA.

... ... Petitioner.

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party.

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Dr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, A.P.P. ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. M. BADAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 20-07-2022

¶12

This is an application for bail in Crime No.338 of 2020 (S.T. Case No.30 of 2021) registered with Police StationMadhepura for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

Earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected with a liberty to him to renew his prayer if the trial is not concluded within a period of nine months. It is reported that despite lapse of nine months, the trial has not been concluded and the case is only committed to the court of sessions.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. He argued that co-accused with similar accusation are granted bail vide order dated 04.09.2021 by the coordinate Bench of this Court. It is further argued that the post-mortem report show that there

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6958 of 2022(3) dt.20-07-2022 2/4

¶16

were no external injuries on the body of the deceased.

¶17

The learned A.P.P. opposed the application.

¶18

It is case of the prosecution that the applicant along with the co-accused had committed murder of Dulari Devi, who happens to be mother of first informant Arun Sah.

¶19

The report of post-mortem examination of dead body of Dulari Devi shows that the dead body was not having any external injuries. The dead body was that of a thinly built old women and opinion as to cause of death was reserved by the Autopsy Surgeon.

¶20

The first informant is son of deceased Dulari Devi. He averred that because of dispute over the drainage water, the accused persons including the applicant started scuffle with the prosecuting party. Therefore, the first informant ran away and, subsequently, he found that his old mother Dulari Devi is killed by the applicant and his associates.

¶21

Prima facie, there is no evidence regarding homicidal death of Dulari Devi. The first informant is not an eye witness to the alleged incident. Applicant is behind bars from 18.06.2020.

¶22

Considering this nature of evidence against the applicant, I see no reason to refuse bail to him and, therefore, the

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6958 of 2022(3) dt.20-07-2022 3/4

¶24

following orders:

¶25

(i). The application is allowed.

¶26

(ii). The applicant in Crime No.338 of 2020 (S.T. Case No.30 of 2021) registered with Police Station-Madhepura for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on executing P.R. bond of Rs.10000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) and on furnishing surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with the following conditions:

¶27

(I). The applicant should not extend any threat, promise or inducement to the persons acquainted with the facts of the accusation against him so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶28

(II). The applicant should cooperate the trial in expeditious disposal of the trial against him.

¶29

(III). The applicant should not contact the members of the prosecuting party as well as witnesses in this case in any manner till conclusion of the trial.

¶30

(IV). The applicant should not repeat commission of similar offence in future and if he is found to be involved in commission of similar offence, the

¶31

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6958 of 2022(3) dt.20-07-2022 4/4

¶32

State is at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail

¶33

granted to the applicant in the instant case.

¶34

The applicant to remove all office objections forthwith

¶35

and the Registry to issue the certified copy of this order only after removal of office objections by the applicant.

¶36

(A. M. Badar, J)

¶37

P.S./-

¶38

U T

Balram Swarnkar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balram Swarnkar 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

Krishana Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Lal Babu Mahato Vs the State of Bihar

Pratima Kumari Vs the State of Bihar

Shankar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Jalendra Manjhi @ Jalo Vs The State of Bihar

Deepak Kumar Paswan @ Deepak Kumar Vs The State of Bihar