Vikash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.40095 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -467 Year- 2015 Thana -MANER District- PATNA ====================================================== Vikash Kumar, Son of Sri Santosh Singh, Resident of Village- Chhitnama , Police Station- Maner in the district of Patna, Presently residing in village Nawahi, Police Station Naubatpur in the district of Patna. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-11-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioner is in custody since 16.05.2016 in connection with Maner P.S. Case No. 467 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Case diary in the present case was called for, which has since been received.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though a clear cut allegation has been made against the petitioner, there is no eye-witness to the occurrence and it is only on account of the fact that there was a family dispute that the name of the present petitioner has been brought in connection with the present case.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40095 of 2016 (3) dt.09-11-2016 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that since there is no eye- witness of the occurrence, the petitioner may be released on bail.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State after perusal of the case diary submits that it has come on record that the present petitioner along with his brother had been intimidating and threatening the deceased with regard to the partition of the property which they had not accepted. It is further submitted that even prior to the occurrence, the grand father (deceased) of the present petitioner had filed an informatory petition regarding the fact that this petitioner was intimidating and threatening him. In view of such facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner on regular bail. It is, accordingly, rejected.

(Anjana Mishra, J.) ravi/- U T