Indrajeet Kumar @ Komal @ Kumal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24258 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-272 Year-2021 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== INDRAJEET KUMAR @ KOMAL @ KUMAL Son of Nand Kishore Singh Resident of village - Rewa Basantpur Dakshni, P.S.- Saraiya, District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sanidh, Ms. Kumari Vandana, Advocates.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 07-07-2023 Heard Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sanidh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Saraiya PS Case No. 272/2021 registered on 13.04.2021 for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the IPC.

3. As per prosecution case, petitioner along with other accused persons assaulted and killed brother of the informant. Allegation against co-accused, Rohit Kumar is that he assaulted the deceased by means of knife and the petitioner surrounded wire around the neck of the deceased and pulled him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation made in the FIR is not correct and the informant does

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24258 of 2023(2) dt.07-07-2023 2/2 not appear to be an eyewitness. He further submits that no motive has been assigned in the FIR against the accused persons for committing the present offence. He further submits that no independent witness has come forward to support the prosecution story.

5. I have heard counsel for the parties.

6. It appears that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he participated in the killing of the brother of the informant. The postmortem report reflects injury over the neck of the deceased which corroborates the prosecution story. The investigation against the petitioner is still going on.

7. Accordingly, taking into consideration the nature of allegation and the fact that the injury caused to the deceased in the neck corroborated the statement made in the FIR and the investigation is still pending, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is, hereby dismissed.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) perwez U T