Amit Ray @ Amit Kumar @ Chhote Sarkar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39760 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-556 Year-2022 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== Amit Ray @ Amit Kumar @ Chhote Sarkar Son Of Ganesh Ray Resident Of Village- Harpur Ailoth, Ps- Musarigharari, Distt- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mahendra Pratap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-09-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 16.01.2023 in connection with Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No. 556 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 25.11.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. According to prosecution case, the husband of the informant shot dead by accused persons including the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and the name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused and except the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39760 of 2023(3) dt.18-09-2023 2/2 confessional statement of the co-accused, no other material has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of material available on record and case diary has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that on the basis of confessional statement of the petitioner, the arms in question which was used in the present crime in question has been recovered and apart from the aforesaid, tower location of the petitioner also suggest that he was present near the place of occurrence. He further submits that the petitioner carries five criminal antecedents other than the present one.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No. 556 of 2022 pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate II, Samastipur.

8. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T