Ranglal Kumar @ Jhunna v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16561 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2023 Thana- AKHODHIGOLA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Ranglal Kumar @ Jhunna, Son of Raghunath Singh @ Chhathu, Resident of Village - Madhurampur, P.S. - Akodhigola, District - Rohtas ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, Advocate Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anant Kumar 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 02-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The accused/petitioner seeks bail in connection with Akodhigola P.S. Case No.78 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC').
3. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and is in custody since 14.04.2023.
4. As per FIR, the minor son of the informant aged about 14 years was stabbed by scissors point by this petitioner causing his death.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for petitioner that no motive has been attributed behind the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16561 of 2025(6) dt.02-09-2025 2/3 present occurrence. It is submitted that the assault as alleged was not repeated, without having any intervening circumstance and, therefore, it cannot be said that petitioner was under intention to cause death. It is submitted that that due to certain local provocative issue, the present occurrence took place and, therefore, the lodging of FIR under Section 302 of IPC is completely bad in eyes of law. While concluding argument, it is submitted that investigation of this case is already completed, for which, charge-sheet has been submitted and, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. The petitioner found involved in one more criminal case, where he is on bail.
6. Learned APP for the State while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that the informant is the eye-witness of the occurrence before whom, his minor son was brutally assaulted by this petitioner using scissor. It is submitted that the injuries as mentioned in postmortem report also corroborate the version of informant being an eye-witness of the occurrence qua manner of assault and nature of weapon used.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16561 of 2025(6) dt.02-09-2025 3/3
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of fact, as allegation qua fatal physical assault by using scissor is available specifically against this petitioner, accordingly, the prayer of bail of petitioner stands rejected herewith, for the present.
8. However, as the petitioner remains in custody for about two years and four months, learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial, preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receiving of a copy of this order. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.) Sanjeet/- U T