Ranjay Ojha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22326 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-180 Year-2019 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN DistrictGopalganj ====================================================== Ranjay Ojha, Son of Daroga Ojha, Resident of Village-Konhwa, Police Station-Gopalganj, District-Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Lokesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. M.K. Nirala, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 27-11-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
In this case, the petitioner is seeking bail in connection with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No.180 of 2019, registered for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The father of the petitioner is the informant of this case in which younger son had died and the present petitioner is the elder brother of the deceased. There was money dispute between his both sons, namely, Ranjay Ojha and Sachin Ojha. One day before the incident, there was oral altercation of the petitioner with his father and both have gone to the police station. The matter was settled, but on the fateful day, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22326 of 2020(3) dt.27-11-2020 2/2 petitioner had fired upon the victim, who died there. Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no eye witness to the occurrence. Admittedly the informant is not the eye witness, but he received the information from his wife. The mother has been examined and he has given the details that on firing she rushed and found his son lying on bed. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a period of one year after restoration of normalcy.
(Shivaji Pandey, J) V.K.Pandey/- U T