Ramautar Pandit v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.31047 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -234 Year- 2013 Thana -AKBARPUR District- NAWADA ====================================================== Ramautar Pandit Son of Musahari Pandit Resident of Village - Puraini, P.S. Govindpur, District Nawada.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyendra Nr.Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 13-01-2015 Heard both sides.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Akbarpur P.S. Case No. 234 of 2013 for the offence registered under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant named the petitioner alleging that his sister and brother-in-law were killed by the Ramautar Pandit, Kuldip @ Bhutali Pandit and others.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31047 of 2014 (4) dt.13-01-2015 2/2 informant is not an eye witness of the occurrence. During course of investigation, Vinay Choudhury in paragraph - 8 and S. Shyam Sundar Prasad in paragraph -9 disclosed that they saw the petitioner and others fleeing away from the place of occurrence in the early morning, having tangi in their hands but these two persons did not make any statement before the police at the earliest and as such, the statement appears to be afterthought. Witnesses have categorically stated that when they were going to the Gosala of Pati Pandit, they saw the petitioner alongwith others fleeing away from the place of occurrence, having tangi in their hands. The witnesses went to the place of occurrence and found Pati Pandit and his wife lying dead. The injuries, found on the person of deceased were caused by sharp weapons, considering the facts, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Jagdish/- U T