Shushil Kumar @ Raja Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30054 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2020 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali ====================================================== SHUSHIL KUMAR @ RAJA PRASAD Son of Shiv Jee Rai Resident of Village- Piroi, Police Station- Goraul, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Madanjeet Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary For the informant :

Mr. Shakil Ahmad Khan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 08-01-2021 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, through video conferencing.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Goraul Police Station Case No. 144 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147/148/149/302/447/448/ 342/323/324 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation, as per the First Information Report, is that the petitioner along with other co-accused persons assaulted the son of the informant by means of lathi and danda, due to which he died.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to land dispute between the parties. He further submits that altogether

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30054 of 2020(3) dt.08-01-2021 2/2 10 persons named and 12 unknown persons have been made accused in this case and from perusal of the First Information Report, it would be evident that the petitioner has assaulted the son of the informant on his neck by means of lathi. He further submits that in the post mortem examination report, no injury has been found on the neck of the deceased.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as learned Counsel for the informant vehemently oppose the prayer for bail and submit that there is allegation of assault against the petitioner along with other coaccused persons, due to which the son of the informant died. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record and the nature of allegation levelled in the First Information Report, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner, at this stage. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after six months from today, if the trial does not show any progress.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √