Sujit Paswan @ Sujit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24286 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2020 Thana- CHHATAUNI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Sujit Paswan @ Sujit Kumar Son Of Late Rupnarayan Ram R/O VillageBarkurwa, P.S.- Motihari Mufassil, Dist.- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jai Prakash Verma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 03-02-2022 This matter has been taken up for hearing online because of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected to honour his undertaking to remove the defects as pointed out by the office when called upon to do so by the office. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Chhatauni P.S. Case no. 124 of 2020 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 436 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the FIR, prior to the occurrence, there was a quarrel between the deceased and the petitioner in which petitioner has threatened to burn him alive. It is further alleged that while the deceased was sleeping in his hut, one person in white shirt and black pant was setting fire in the hut of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24286 of 2021(3) dt.03-02-2022 2/2 Sonu Kumar and succeeded in fleeing away as per seen the CCTV footage. Witnesses have identified the fled person as the petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. As per postmortem report cause of death is shock due to dry burn. He has got no criminal antecedent. Name of the petitioner has been taken by the witnesses, which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of bail. He submitted that the petitioner is still absconding and processes under Sections 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C. has already been issued against him.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the case is heinous in nature and petitioner is named in the FIR and also there is specific overt act against him, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and, as such, his application for bail is rejected. (Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U T