Guddu Kumar Singh @ Guddu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37920 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2021 Thana- UDWANTNAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Guddu Kumar Singh @ Guddu Singh S/O Balwant Singh R/O Village Mathurapur, P.S-Koilwar, District-Bhojpur At Ara. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shankar Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anand Mohan Prasad Mehta, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within four weeks of start of normal functioning of the physical court.

Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Udwantnagar (Gajrajganj O.P.) P.S. Case No. 95 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 364 of the Indian Penal Code, later on charge sheet has been submitted under Section 302/120B of the Indian Penal Code.

According to prosecution case, as per the F.I.R. the informant lives at Sankar Mochan Nagar, Ara with her husband and children. On 24.02.2021, the husband of the informant namely Umesh Kumar Singh, on call by Ankaj Kumar had gone

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37920 of 2021(4) dt.10-03-2022 2/3 to meet him at his house at Jagdeo Nagar but did not return till evening. In the morning, the informant received a message on her mobile from the mobile of her husband demanding rupees twenty lakhs from the informant in which it was also threatened that if the money is not given, her husband would be killed. The informant asked Ankaj upon which he replied that he, alongwith the husband of the informant had gone to Masadh from where they were returning but in the way one person was met and the husband of the informant went with the said person and he returned to Ara by a tempo. However, during investigation, it transpired that the husband of the informant has been murdered.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and has committed no offence and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and the name of the petitioner has been transpired only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, namely, Ankaj Kumar. He further submits that the co-accused namely Ankaj Kumar has confessed his complicity and the complicity of this petitioner in the murder of the husband of the informant and on the disclosure made by the petitioner, the T.V.S. motorcycle of the deceased has been recovered.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37920 of 2021(4) dt.10-03-2022 3/3 27.02.2021.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail on the basis of material available on the record in the case diary submits that it appears from the record that complicity of the petitioner in the murder of the husband of the informant is available in the case diary. He further submits that the bail petition of co-accused namely Ankaj Kumar has been rejected vide order dated 24.02.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 44708 of 2021.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner and accordingly, the same stands rejected.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) mdrashid/- U T