Sunil Kumar Gupta @ Dabbu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33584 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-501 Year-2019 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR SADAR DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== SUNIL KUMAR GUPTA @ DABBU Son of Basudeo Sah Resident of Village - Subhash Nagar, Road No.9, P.S.- Saqdar, Distt.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajendra Narayan, Sr. Adv Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Adv.
For the Informant :
Ms. Bela Singh, Adv.
For the State :
Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 29-03-2022 Heard Mr. Rajendra Narayan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Bela Singh, learned counsel appearing for the informant and Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Muzaffarpur Sadar PS Case No. 501/2019 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
As per the First Information Report, petitioner along with other accused persons arrived at the house of informant and started abusing and assaulting his father by the butt of the pistol due to which, his father died.
Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33584 of 2021(4) dt.29-03-2022 2/3 the allegation against the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature and the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to land dispute and political rivalry. He next submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and during course of investigation no cogent material has come against the petitioner and in the postmortem report only two abrasions have been found on the person of deceased. Petitioner is in custody since 16.09.2020.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant referring to paragraphs-25 and 26 of the case diary submits that during course of investigation the witnesses have categorically stated that the petitioner has assaulted the old father of the informant by the butt of pistol and in the postmortem report there is lacerated wound 1 1⁄2 x 1⁄2 scalp deep occipital region. Accordingly, her submission is that it was the petitioner who assaulted the informant's father due to which he died. This Court vide order dated 22.02.2022 had called for a report from the learned Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur regarding the stage of trial and in pursuance thereof, report vide letter no. 139/22 dated 05.03.2022 has been received and from perusal of the same, it appears that out of fourteen charge-sheet witnesses four witnesses have been examined and cross-examined and ten
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33584 of 2021(4) dt.29-03-2022 3/3 witnesses including I.O. and doctor are yet to be examined. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in his report submits that the trial is likely to be concluded within four months.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant submits that according to her instruction only one witness is yet to be examined.
Regards being had to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the prima facie material collected during course of investigation, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner at this stage. The same is, hereby, dismissed.
Petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after four months from today, if the trial does not record any substantial progress.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) perwez U T