Pramod Bhagat v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC12 Feb 2024CR. MISC./6012/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.6012 of 2020, order dated 12-02-2024, Satyavrat Verma, J. Anticipatory bail application of Pramod Bhagat and Mithlesh Kumar in connection with PS Case No.-292 of 2019 (Turkauliya, East Champaran) for offences under Sections 302, 201, 120B and 34 IPC rejected; the prosecution relied on the arrest and confessional statement of the deceased's wife naming the petitioners, and the Court declined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

Considering the submissions made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the Court was not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. ¶¶24-25

Pramod Bhagat Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6012 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-292 Year-2019 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Pramod Bhagat S/O- Amerdev Bhagat Resident Of Village - Babhnauliya, P.S. - Turkauliya, District - East Champaran.

¶5

Mithlesh Kumar S/O- Kishun Bhagat Resident Of Village - Hardiya, P.S. - Turkauliya (Raghunathpur), District - East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bal Govind Sharma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1 Ms.Shail Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

5 12-02-2024

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners,

¶13

learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their

¶15

arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under

¶16

Sections 302, 201, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits

¶18

that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and

¶19

have been falsely implicated in the present case being Sarhu

¶20

and brother in law (sala) of the deceased.

¶21

Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application and

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6012 of 2020(5) dt.12-02-2024 2/2

¶23

submits that the wife of the deceased was having illicit relationship with the petitioner no.1, who is brother in-law (Jija) of the wife of the deceased. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation, the wife of the deceased was arrested and she in her confessional statement disclosed the name of the petitioners, who have been involved in the occurrence. It is thus submitted that since the wife of the deceased has taken the name of the petitioners, who are her Jija and brother, as such, the petitioners are not entitled for the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶24