Ravishankar @ Ravi Gope v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33558 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-208 Year-2022 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Ravishankar @ Ravi Gope Son of Satya Narayan Ray @ Satya Narayan Resident of Village - Yadav Gali, Ramji Chak, Police Station - Digha, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 10-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 208 of 2022, lodged on 28.03.2022, under Sections 302/34/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against four unknown accused persons against whom there is allegation that they have made indiscriminate firing on the husband of the informant due to which he suffered injury on his head and chest, went to hospital for treatment where the doctor has declared him dead.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33558 of 2024(3) dt.10-07-2024 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that there are nine criminal cases pending against the petitioner. In eight cases he is on bail and in one he has been acquitted. He is in custody since 23.12.2023. Counsel submits that case has been lodged against unknown accused persons. His name has surfaced during investigation on the basis of confessional statement of his brother co-accused Raju Kumar @ Raju Gope but the aforesaid statement has got no evidentiary value. Counsel submits that no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Counsel submits that charge sheet against the petitioner has already been submitted in this case.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner's name has figured on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Raju @ Raju Gope. Specific allegation against the petitioner that he has supported in the crime of murder.

6. In this background, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Mkr./- U T