Allowed

Shyam Babu Pandit v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC28 Sept 2022CR. MISC./8681/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court heard two criminal miscellaneous applications for bail filed by relatives of the victim in a case involving death of a child during an altercation. The court allowed bail by directing the petitioners to furnish bonds of Rs. 20,000 each with sureties, subject to standard and additional conditions, noting the likelihood of accidental death and the submission of the charge sheet.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000 each with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 437(3) CrPC and specific undertak

Shyam Babu Pandit Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69668 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2021 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali

¶3

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

¶4

Savita Devi, W/o Shyam Babu Pandit, Resident of Village - Bali, P.S.- Gauri Chak, Distt.- Patna, Bihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

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

¶10

with

¶11

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 8681 of 2022

¶12

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2021 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali

¶13

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

¶14

Shyam Babu Pandit, S/o Late Sarjug Pandit, R/o Village - Bali, P.S. - Gauri Chak, District - Patna, Bihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶19

====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 69668 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Satish Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 8681 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prakash Chandra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Fahimuddin, APP

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

3 28-09-2022

¶24

Since both the applications arise out of Raghopur P.S. Case No. 37 of 2021, as such, they have been taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order.

¶25

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶26

APP for the State.

¶27

Let the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from the date of

¶28

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69668 of 2021(3) dt.28-09-2022 2/4

¶29

resumption of physical filing and physical removal of defect.

¶30

In the present case, the petitioners seek bail in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 37 of 2021 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 427, 323, 302, 504, 354 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of Dayan Act.

¶31

As per prosecution case, the birth of a dead child took place in the house of the informant to her son and the petitioners along with co-accused who are the maternal grand-parents and maternal uncle of the dead child, respectively came to the house of the informant and started hurling abuses saying that being a witch the informant caused the death of the child. The son of the informant forbade his parents-in-law and during scuffle the husband of the informant tried to save his son and he was attacked by petitioner Shayam Babu Pandit on his head and he subsequently died during his treatment in P.M.C.H.

¶32

The learned counsels for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The occurrence as alleged has not taken place in the manner as alleged in the FIR. It was the son of the informant who tried to hit the petitioner Shayam Babu Pandit by a bamboo stick and the husband of the informant tried to save his samdhi

¶33

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69668 of 2021(3) dt.28-09-2022 3/4

¶34

and he accidentally got hurt in that assault. This fact is clear from the delayed lodging of the FIR. The fardbeyan was recorded after delay of 7 days on 28.01.2021 and the FIR was lodged on 01.03.2021 and the occurrence had taken place on 22.01.2021. The inordinate delay in recording the fardbeyan and lodging of the FIR clearly shows after thought and deliberation and concoction of the prosecution case. It is also not believable that the petitioners and other c-accused would go to the other village and commit such an occurrence. The petitioners were apprehended from their house and if they were guilty, they would have certainly fled away from their house. After reconciliation of the matter the daughter of the petitioner has started living in her matrimonial home, though she was earlier kicked out on 28.01.2021. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case and the petitioners are in custody since 06.07.2021.

¶35

Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail submitting that there is specific allegation against the petitioner Shayam Babu Pandit and the same is supported by the statements of the witnesses recorded in paragraphs 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the case diary.

¶36

Perused the records.

¶37

Having regard to the facts and circumstances and

¶38

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69668 of 2021(3) dt.28-09-2022 4/4

¶39

submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that there is likelihood of accidental death during altercation and scuffle between the relatives and further considering the period of custody of the petitioners and submission of chargesheet, the petitioners above named are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Hajipur, Vaishali in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 37 of 2021, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also the following conditions :

¶40

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners.

¶41

(ii) The petitioners will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below.

¶42

(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

¶43

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

¶44

balmukund/-

¶45

U T

Shyam Babu Pandit v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Babu Pandit 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 Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Chhunu Singh @ Chandan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Anil Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Kapil Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Chandar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Bikash Kumar @ Bikash Paswan Vs The State of Bihar