Patna High CourtCR. MISC./4952/2017disposed

Ganesh Kumar Mehta @ Ganesh Kr. Mehta v. The State Of Bihar

2017-04-072 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4952 of 2017 (3) dt.07-04-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.4952 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -246 Year- 2016 Thana -FORBESGANJ District- ARRARIA ======================================================

1. Ganesh Kumar Mehta @ Ganesh Kr. Mehta S/o Badri Mehta VillageSirsiya, P.S.- Forbisganj, District- Araria. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kundan Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Akhileshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 07-04-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner is in custody since 29.05.2016 in connection with Forbishganj P.S. Case No. 246 of 2016 registered under Sections 302, 201 and 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner, who is of clean antecedent, is innocent and has not committed any offence. In fact, the entire F.I.R. has been lodged against the unknown person and the name of this petitioner has been surfaced on the ground of confessional statement of the co-accused, Ajay Mehta. Except the confessional statement, nothing is against the petitioner. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody for the last ten months. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4952 of 2017 (3) dt.07-04-2017 submitted that the petitioner was actively involved in the alleged occurrence and he was last seen with the deceased also. One of the witness, namely, Subodh Sah and co-accused, Ajay Mehta, who has confessed his guilt has supported the implication of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence.

Considering the nature of accusation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of this petitioner is, hereby, rejected. However, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) brajesh/- U T