Sujit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41645 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2024 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui ====================================================== Sujit Kumar SON OF LATE KARU SAH Village -Dubba PS- Sono DistrictJamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rina Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 12-11-2024 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Khaira P.S. Case No. 48 of 2024 for the offence punishable under sections 302/120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 04.02.2024 by the informant, Neera Devi.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that upon information about the murder of her brother-in-law (devar) near Narayan bridge, went there and found the dead body with several injury marks. Further, case is that he used to earn his livelihood by driving tempo and was married but was having dispute with his wife. This led to the FIR.

4. Subsequently, the investigation took place and the role of the petitioner as also his accomplice came into picture. It is to be noted that the petitioner is the son of the deceased and in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41645 of 2024(5) dt.12-11-2024 2/2 his confessional statement, he has narrated the story that his father used to drink, beat his mother which was resented by him and then, he hatched a conspiracy, took his father near the river and with the help of his friends, killed him.

5. Though learned counsel for the petitioner tried to impress upon this Court about the innocence of this petitioner as also the fact that his mother was being beaten by the deceased, learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that this cannot be a ground to take extreme steps of killing his own father.

6. Taking into account the submissions put forwarded by the parties as also the role that has come against the petitioner who is the son of the deceased, this Court is not inclined to extend him the privilege of bail.

7. The present bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U T