Gunjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12701 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2020 Thana- BIHPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Gunjan Kumar Son of Mukesh Kunwar @ Hira Resident of Village- Barghari Tola Sonbarsa, P.S.- Bihpur, Dist.- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amrendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rabindra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 21-06-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, informant along with his brother and deceased Nidhu Kunwar were returning to hime after cutting grass from Diyara, in the meantime, petitioner and other co-accused persons having deadly weapong started abusing and assaulting to the son of the informant. On order of co-accused Mukesh Kumwar, petitioner fired two rounds which hit his son as a result of which he fell down thereafter Ankit Kunwar blow axe on his head due to which he succumbed to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12701 of 2024(3) dt.21-06-2024 2/2 injuries on spot.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact, deceased was himself a veteran criminal and he might be killed by his enemies. Petitioner and informant are agnate and due to land dispute, several family members of the petitioner were dragged in the present case.

5. In compliance of the order dated 16.02.2024, a progress report has been received, which suggests that trial may be concluded within a period of six months.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that trial is likely to be concluded in near future, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and as such, his application for bail is rejected.

7. Trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial within stipulated period failing which petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U