Bablu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36240 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-183 Year-2020 Thana- KHAGAUL District- Patna ====================================================== BABLU KUMAR S/O PUJAN PASWAN R/O VILLAGE-MUKUNDPUR BHAT, P.S-JANDAHA, DISTRICT-VAISHALI AT PRESENT R/O VILLAGE-SULTANPUR DHAROH, P.S-DALSINGHSARAI, DISTRICTSAMASTIPUR. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mrs. Rina Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The matter has been taken up through video conferencing.
Petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 364, 302, 201, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution case, co-accused, Pankaj Kumar, along with brother of informant went to purchase charger of the mobile but they did not return and when informant called his brother on mobile the same was received by co-accused, Pankaj Kumar. Pankaj Kumar confessed that he along with this petitioner and his cousin, Ranjan Paswan committed the murder of brother of informant by throwing him
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36240 of 2021(3) dt.25-01-2022 2/2 in the river Ganga from Gandhi Setu. Motive of alleged occurrence is said to have been illicit relation of co-accused, Pankaj Kumar, with the wife of deceased.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. The informant is not an eye witness of the occurrence and only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, Pankaj Kumar, he has been made accused in this case and Pankaj Kumar has got enmity with petitioner.
Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner is named in the FIR and his complicity in the crime has come during the course of investigation in different paragraphs of case diary. Considering the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) BKS/- U T