Dismissed

Sk. Mumtaz v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC12 Apr 2023CR. MISC./22706/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Cr. Misc. No. 22706 of 2023, the High Court of Judicature at Patna considered a petition for regular bail in a murder case. The Court rejected the application, holding that the heinous nature of the allegation and prior rejection persuaded it not to enlarge the petitioner. The trial Court was directed to expedite the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Application for regular bail rejected; no relief granted to the petitioner.

Sk. Mumtaz Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22706 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-225 Year-2021 Thana- RAMGARHWA District- East

¶3

Champaran

¶4

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

¶5

Sk. Mumtaz, Son of Late Sk. Nathuni, Resident Of Village- Bela Shekh Toli, PS- Ramgarhwa, Distt- East Champaran

¶6

... ... Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 12-04-2023

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect (s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks on resumption of physical mode.

¶13

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

¶14

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 269 of 2022 arising out of Ramgarhwa P.S. Case No. 225 of 2021 dated 26.07.2021 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 302, 201, and 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, on the request of the petitioner and co-accused Md. Kaish, the informant's brother Md. Afroj went to his sasural with them for celebrating Bakrid

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22706 of 2023(2) dt.12-04-2023 2/3

¶17

and was allegedly murdered by the petitioner and the coaccused persons. On information given by the informant's another brother, Md. Firoj that Md. Afroj was murdered, the informant went to his brother's sasural and saw his brother's dead body lying in the field. He also saw blood stained on a pillow and a mat in his brother's sasural.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Charge-sheet has already been submitted. The Post-mortem report does not support the case of the prosecution. The informant's brother's cause of death is intracranial haemorrhage and shock caused by hard and blunt substance. It is a case of sudden provocation. The petitioner is in custody since 31.07.2021.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that it is the petitioner who called the deceased and took him to his sasural and then the petitioner along with the other co-accused committed murder in his sasural and stains of blood on chattai were also found in the house of the petitioner as per the seizure list. It has been further submitted that the wife of the deceased

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22706 of 2023(2) dt.12-04-2023 3/3

¶21

in her confessional statement has stated that the petitioner is guilty in the murder of the informant's brother. Learned A.P.P. has further submitted that the prayer of bail of the petitioner has already been rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 22.08.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 13158 of 2022. He has further submitted that there is no sufficient ground is mentioned in the bail petition filed on behalf of the petitioner.

¶22

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶23

Learned trial Court is further directed to expedite and conclude the trial of this case at the earliest.

¶24

This application is rejected.

¶25

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶26

Gautam/-

¶27

U T

Sk. Mumtaz v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sk. Mumtaz 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

Ranjan Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Chandrama Manjhi @ Chandan Manjhi @ Chandan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajendra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Ekbal Rai Vs the State of Bihar

Raj Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Kamlesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar