Purushottam Kumar @ Purshottam Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14838 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-641 Year-2023 Thana- DHANARUA District- Patna ====================================================== Purushottam Kumar @ Purshottam Kumar Son of Jhalan Shao @ Jhalan Saw Resident of Vill.- Baurhi, P.S.- Dhanarua, Dist.- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Lallu Prasad, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Dhanarua P.S. Case No. 641 of 2023 registered under Sections 363, 365, 302, 201, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, the son of the informant went to Nawada but did not return till date. His mobile phone is also switched off.
4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is not named in the First Information Report. The name of the petitioner has been dragged in the instant case merely on the confessional statement of co-accused Amarnath Kumar due to previous land dispute. Further submission is that informant is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence. The petitioner is a man of clean antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14838 of 2024(3) dt.30-04-2024 2/2
5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner by contending that as a matter of fact, there was love affection between the sister of co-accused Amarnath Kumar and the son of the informant. The petitioner is cousin brother of sister of coaccused Amarnath Kumar. It is further contended that it is a case of honor killing and during course of investigation it has come that petitioner along with co-accused persons committed the murder of both her sister and the son of the informant. Hence, it is not a fit case of anticipatory bail.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of the allegation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) utkarsh/- U T