← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./31035/2020rejected

Baban Kumar @ Snehanand v. The State Of Bihar

2021-07-24Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31035 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-316 Year-2019 Thana- LAXMIPUR District- Jamui ====================================================== BABAN KUMAR @ SNEHANAND Son of Late Jay Narayan Saw Resident of Village - Laxmipur, P.S.- Laxmipur, Distt.- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kumar Kamal Nayan, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pranav Kumar, A.P.P.

For the Informant :

Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 24-07-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with G.R. No. 2405 of 2019 arising out of Laxmipur P.S. Case No. 316 of 2019 for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. In fact, there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner and no specific allegation is attributed to him. The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 29.08.2019.

Learned counsel for the informant and learned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31035 of 2020(8) dt.24-07-2021 2/2 counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and there a series of criminal antecedents against this petitioner which is clearly evident from the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner. As a matter of fact, the post-mortem report also corroborates with the allegation leveled in the F.I.R. against the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of this petitioner is rejected. (Arvind Srivastava, J) Brajesh/- U