Patna High CourtCR. MISC./55054/2015rejected

Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Bhagat v. The State Of Bihar

2016-01-22Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55054 of 2015 (3) dt.22-01-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.55054 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -175 Year- 2003 Thana -MEERGANJ District- GOPALGANJ ======================================================

1. Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Bhagat S/o Late Hira Lal Bhagat R/o village - Chainpur, P.S. Hathua, District - Gopalganj .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amit Kumar Rakesh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh 1 (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 22-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mirganj P.S. Case No. 175 of 2003 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

This is a case of the year 2003 which was registered against unknown and after completing the investigation chargesheet was submitted in the year 2006 against the petitioner and others showing them absconder and further in the court also the petitioner remained absconding and he was arrested on 07.08.2015.

Submission is that the petitioner was not aware regarding

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55054 of 2015 (3) dt.22-01-2016 the case and due to village politics he has been implicated and he has suffered and now he deserves sympathetic consideration to which the learned APP opposes by submitting that during investigation father of the deceased vide paragraph 14 of the case diary has stated that the deceased saw the petitioner having illicit relationship with Guddi Kumari, resulting, the petitioner caused threats and committed the murder, further the wife of the deceased has also stated the name of the petitioner vide paragraph 16 of the case diary.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected. However, after framing of charge the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T