Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24625 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2019 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Sonu Kumar, S/o- Late Bharat Singh, R/o Village- Uttari Nawada, P.S.- Ara Nawada District- Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr.Ravindra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 25-09-2020 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned Advocate assisted by Mr. Ravindra Kumar, learned Advocate on Record and Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for regular bail in connection with Ara Nawada P.S. Case No. 74 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. His earlier prayer for regular bail was rejected on 29.11.2019 after taking note of the materials which had come in course of investigation showing that the petitioner's name has transpired as the main assailant in this case. Mr. Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is suffering from epilepsy since

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24625 of 2020(2) dt.25-09-2020 2/2 2014 and in this connection a medical board was constituted by the order of Civil Surgeon, Bhojpur under the Chairmanship of District Magistrate, Bhojpur and then he was referred to P.M.C.H. for further investigation and report. In this connection, he has referred the opinion of the medical board which is on the record and shows that on 07.03.2020 the medical board had referred the petitioner for treatment to P.M.C.H. This Court is of the considered view that the materials placed before this Court are not in the nature of any change of circumstance which would make the petitioner entitle for grant of bail. All that it appears is that he had suffered from an ailment of epilepsy for which he was sent for treatment. This Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner on this ground. The prayer for bail is, thus, refused. The application is dismissed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) vats/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.