Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Mandal v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4917 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2023 Thana- JAMALPUR District- Munger ====================================================== PAWAN KUMAR @ PAWAN MANDAL SON OF MEGHNATH MANDAL R/O VILLAGE- BARI KESHOPUR, P.S.- JAMALPUR, DIST.- MUNGER ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Swati Parmar, Advocate Mr. Indu Bhushan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Yogendra Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 07-02-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Jamalpur P.S Case no.162 of 2023 registered under sections 302, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said to have shot the son of the informant leading to his death.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. He is not an eye witness to the occurrence. The manner of occurrence is other than what has been narrated in the FIR. The petitioner is in custody since 29.8.2023 and investigation in the case has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4917 of 2024(2) dt.07-02-2024 2/2 concluded. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of having shot at the informant's son leading to his death. Even the weapon in question was recovered on the basis of the disclosure made by the petitioner.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner of being the assailant of the deceased, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected. (Partha Sarthy, J) Shiv/- U T