Rohit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41455 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-472 Year-2020 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria ====================================================== ROHIT KUMAR Son of Pawan Singh Resident of Village - Shri Rampur Thuthi, P.O.- Temtha, P.S.- Parbatta, Distt.- Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 07-01-2022 Heard Mr. Shashank Shekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Choubey Jawahar, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through video conferencing. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Parbatta PS Case No. 472/2020 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/201/34 of the IPC. As per prosecution case lodged by Chowkidar that a dead body of a person was found lying near outhouse of Pappu Sangahi having deep injury on the head. The FIR was lodged against unknown persons.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR, however, during course of investigation, confessional statements of co-accused persons, namely, Kunal Kanhaiya and Chhotu Kumar @ Chhotu Thakur

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41455 of 2021(4) dt.07-01-2022 2/3 were recorded wherein they have stated that it was the petitioner who killed the deceased by means of sharp cutting weapon and bullet. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that from perusal of the postmortem report, it would be evident that the deceased did not receive any fire-arm injury and the cause of death is due to assault upon the deceased by hard and blunt substance.

It is further submitted that even if the confessional statement of the co-accused persons is taken, for the sake of argument, the same is not corroborated by the postmortem report of the deceased. He next submits that petitioner is a stranger to the deceased and his family members and he has not committed any offence in the manner alleged.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, referring to the case diary, submits that as per CDR, location of the petitioner was found near the place of occurrence and the coaccused persons took the name of the petitioner in their confessional statements. As such, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.

Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the material on record and the nature of allegation and fact that the death of the deceased has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41455 of 2021(4) dt.07-01-2022 3/3 not been caused by fire arm injury, the petitioner is in custody since 09.01.2021 and the charge-sheet has been submitted in the matter, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, let the petitioner, ROHIT KUMAR be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty-five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Parbatta PS Case No. 472/2020.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) perwez U T