Rahul Kumar Dubey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14547 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -628 Year- 2015 Thana -SASARAM NAGAR District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Rahul Kumar Dubey, son of Late Akhileshwar Dubey resident of VillageBhadokhara, P.S.- Tilauthu, District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Narayansingh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ahmad Ali(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 19-05-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sasaram (Tilauthu) P.S. Case No. 628 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, Brij Bhushan Dubey @ Pintu Dubey, the uncle of the informant was found killed and the petitioner lodged first information report but during investigation it transpires that the petitioner killed his uncle with aid and assistance of other coaccused. Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner being the informant of this case has named three partners of the brick kiln as suspect, but during investigation only on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14547 of 2016 (3) dt.19-05-2016 2/2 Vakil Kumar which was recorded in Sasaram (Tilauthu) P. S. Case No. 770 of 2015, the petitioner was apprehended and the police recorded his confessional statement forcibly resulting he is suffering in custody without any fault.

The learned A.P.P seriously opposes the prayer of the bail by submitting that on the basis of confessional statement of the petitioner, the wrench which was used for killing the deceased was recovered from bush of Ahar vide paragraph 56 of the case diary and further from call detail also, his involvement transpires.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that on the basis of confessional statement of the petitioner, the wrench used in the crime was recovered and as such I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly his prayer stands rejected in connection with Sasaram (Tilauthu) P.S. Case No. 628 of 2015 pending in the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-IV, Rohtas at Sasaram.

However, let the trial be expedited and concluded preferably within nine months from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this order.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Mishra/- U T