Rintu Paswan @ Rajkishor Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39400 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2022 Thana- BARAHAT District- Banka ====================================================== RINTU PASWAN @ RAJKISHOR PASWAN Son of Late Deep Narayan Paswan, Resident of Village - Bara Tikar, P.S.- Barahat, Distt.- Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pankaj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. J. N. Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-05-2023 The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. J. N. Thakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Banka (Barahat) P.S. Case No. 01/2022, registered for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant of this case is wife of the deceased. She has mentioned in her Fardbeyan that on 31.12.2021 at about 8:00 P.M., the petitioner came to her house and called her husband to participate in a meat party. Her husband went with the petitioner, but he did not return. On the next morning, his dead body was found in a pit.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39400 of 2022(3) dt.11-05-2023 2/2 the petitioner is innocent. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and except the theory of last seen, there is nothing against the petitioner.

On the other hand, Mr. J. N. Thakur, the learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the petitioner called the deceased at the pretext of participating in a meat party and after killing him, he concealed his dead body in a pit.

It appears from perusal of paragraph 40 of the case diary that a mobile set was also recovered with the dead body, which belongs to the petitioner, which shows the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence.

In my view, the petitioner does not deserve the privileges for bail, which is accordingly rejected. Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioner within the stipulated time mentioned hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Mahesh/- U T