Pancham @ Pawan @ Pancham Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2845 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-332 Year-2018 Thana- RUPASPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Pancham @ Pawan @ Pancham Kumar Son of Bijendra Ray @ Birendra Yadav @ Bijendra Yadav Resident of Village - Saguna Khaira Kuan Gandhi Murti, P.S.- Danapur, Distt - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Kant Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-02-2020 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Rupaspur P.S. Case No. 332 of 2018, registered for offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Prosecution case is that informant got information that her grandson has been murdered near Prashray Apartment and she named the petitioner and others as the person, who killed his grandson. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case and there is no eye witness of the occurrence and he is not named in the F.I.R., later on his name transpired in this case. has been in custody for four months. Further submission is that several other accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by different coordinate Benches of this Court, which is annexure -2 series of this petition and petitioner has been in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2845 of 2020(3) dt.25-02-2020 2/2 judicial custody since 11.11.2019.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail drawing my attention to paragraph - 108 of the case diary, in which, witnesses have claimed to be eye witness of the occurrence and named the petitioner and other accused persons, who have assaulted the grandson of informant, causing his death. To which, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the said witness has also named co-accused Ravindra Kumar, who has been enlarged on bail by the then coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.08.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 39590 of 2019. Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstance of the case and though, one co-accused, namely, Ravindra Kumar has been enlarged on bail, however, the fact that the witness has named the said co-accused has not been mentioned in the order dated 26.08.2019, as such, at this stage, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunilkumar/- U T