Prince Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18607 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2020 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== Prince Kumar, aged about 25 years (male), son of Pradeep Kumar Sah, resident of village - Gulzarbag, Ward No. 20, P.S.-Madhepura, District - Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajendra Narain , Sr. Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ansul Mr. Khurshid Anwar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 15-12-2020 Heard Mr. Rajendra Narain, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ansul, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Khurshid Anwar, learned counsel for the State through video conferencing.

Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 61 of 2020 registered under Section 394 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The allegation as per the First Information Report is that while the informant along with his brother was returning back to his home from the shop they were accosted by three unknown persons and one of the accused persons fired upon them which hit the brother of the informant - Dhiraj Kumar and the accused persons thereafter snatched a bag from the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18607 of 2020(4) dt.15-12-2020 2/3 informant containing two keys.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has falsely been implicated in this case on the basis of confessional statement of the petitioner recorded by the Police. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner is neighbour of the informant and the victim and he has not been identified at the place of occurrence by them. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner is in custody since 30.01.2020.

On the other hand learned counsel for the State as well as informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submit that the petitioner was having illicit relationship with the wife of the victim who received bullet injury in his spinal chord and was seriously injured inasmuch as during the course of investigation the petitioner has given a vivid description of the offence and has stated that the petitioner wanted to marry with the wife of the injured and in furtherance of that intention he hired a killer in order to eliminate the brother of the informant so that the petitioner may marry with his wife.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18607 of 2020(4) dt.15-12-2020 3/3 further video clips and other photographs are available which will go to show that petitioner was having illicit relation with the wife of the victim due to which he entered into a conspiracy with a contract killer to eliminate the victim from the scene. Learned counsel further submits that after investigation the Police has submitted charge sheet against the petitioner under Section 307 , 379 , 120B of the I.P.C.

Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the materials available on record , I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner at this stage.

The same is rejected.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for regular bail after six months from today if the trial does not record any progress.

praful/- (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) U T