Rambalak Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13185 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-379 Year-2018 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ====================================================== RAMBALAK MANJHI Son of Prayag Manjhi Resident of Village-Purarh, Police Station-Atri, District-Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Satyendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 24-06-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 379 of 2018 for the offence under Sections 302, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who is of clean antecedent, is innocent and has not committed any offence. It is submitted that the petitioner only took the deceased to the forest for hunting the Chanbudari and no occurrence took place there. The petitioner has only last seen with the petitioner and except that no material has come during course of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13185 of 2020(4) dt.24-06-2020 2/2 investigation against the petitioner. Merely on the basis of suspicion the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 13.01.2019.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner has insisted the deceased to go to the forest for hunting the Chanbudari and killed him. The witnesses have supported the prosecution version which is evident from paragraph 26, 27 and 28 of the case diary.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of this petitioner is rejected. However, learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of nine months from the date of this order.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) brajesh/- U T