Jittu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6392 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2018 Thana- ALIPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== Jittu Kumar Son Of Saket Kumar Resident Of Village - Lari , P.S.- Kurtha, Distt.- Jehanabad (Arwal) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manish Kumar No2 For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. H.A. Khan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within three weeks. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Petitioner is said to have committed murder of the son of the informant by firing bullet.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is innocent, not named in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the name of the petitioner transpired on the confessional statement of one Amit Gaurav who stated that this petitioner was also with him. He

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6392 of 2022(23) dt.13-07-2022 2/2 submits that occurrence took place on 20.06.2018 but the same was sent to the Magistrate on 25.06.2018 for which no explanation was given. He submits that the similarly situated co-accused has already been granted bail by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.12.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 66398 of 2018. He further submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this application.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner is also involved in the present case. Considering the fact that there is sufficient material against this petitioner in the case diary, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected in connection with Alipur P.S. Case No. 54 of 2018.

However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the same shall be considered by the learned court below on the same day considering the fact that similarly situated co-accused has already been granted bail by a Bench of this Court. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T