Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

It is very unfortunate to note that in this case wherein the prosecution is alleging that a lady Advocate had conspired and killed her husband named Amrendra Kumar, counter affidavit field by the State only because of order passed by this Court on 22.01.2022 is far from satisfactory.

This is so because in the counter affidavit it is not mentioned that applicant/accused Pratima Kumari was having talk with contract killers named Bimlesh Kumar @ Chotan and Nikhil Kumar Pandey @ Golu. However the learned Additional Public Prosecutor is vehemently arguing that applicant Pratima Kumari was having talk with accused Bimlesh Kumar @ Chotan and Nikhil Kumar Pandey @ Golu and evidence in the form of call detail records came to be collected by the prosecution. Question therefore normally comes in the mind of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42804 of 2021(3) dt.04-03-2022 the Court as to why this prime evidence is not figuring in the counter affidavit of the Investigating Officer.

In this view of the matter, the respondent/State is directed to file affidavit of the responsible Investigating Officer mentioning all evidence, if any, appearing against the appellant in the subject case."

It seems that the prosecution wing of the State is not interested in opposing the bail petition as the important evidence is not mentioned in the counter affidavit filed by the State in pursuance of the order dated 22.01.2022. This Court has questioned as to what is the evidence to show that mobile phones are seized from contract killers/accused Bimlesh Kumar @ Chotan and Nikhil Kumar Pandey @ Golu, which were those numbers and what was the mobile phone number of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42804 of 2021(3) dt.04-03-2022 applicant/accused Pratima Kumari. Unfortunately, this information is not forthcoming. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor is only saying that he will place the case diary before the Court.

What is expected to be pointed out to the Court is seizure memo of the mobile phone containing the mobile numbers from which the contract killers/co-accused had talked with the applicant/accused Pratima Kumari so also seizure memo of mobile phone of applicant Pratima Kumari having that SIM card of that particular phone number.

As despite the order dated 22.01.2022, the requisite material is not forthcoming, this Court directs the concerned Superintendent of Police to swear his personal affidavit explaining the facts as stated in the forthcoming paragraph of this order constituting the evidence if any against the present applicant regarding conspiracy by having talks with the contract killers for eliminating her husband.