H.C.MISHRA,J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution.
(2.) THE petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 364, 365, 498 -A, 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Giridih (T) P.S. Case No. 8 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. No. 87 of 2010. The case relates to disappearance and the alleged murder of the daughter of the informant and from the F.I.R., it appears that the petitioner is the husband of the victim lady. It appears from the F.I.R. that the informant, who is father of the victim, was informed that on 5.1.2010, his daughter ecome traceless but when he tried to get the information from her son -in -law, he gave evasive replies. It also appears from the impugned order that a dead body was found by Howrah G.R.P. on 24.12.2009 in an an iron from the sleeper coach of Mithila Express and the photograph of the dead body was published in the newspaper, on the basis of which, the family members of the deceased identified the dead body to be that of the daughter of the informant.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. It has been submitted that there is no eyewitness to the occurrence and even though, the photograph of the dead body has been identified to be that of the wife of the petitioner, from the statements of witnesses recorded in the case diary, it would appear that wife of the petitioner had become traceless from 3.1.2010. In this connection, the statement of landlord of the house is also available in the case diary, which shows that the victim is traceless since 3.1.2010. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that that the dead body which was recovered on 24.12.2009 cannot be that of the wife of the petitioner. Learned counsel accordingly, prayed for bail.;