Khelawan Sao v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36993 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-220 Year-2019 Thana- SOHSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== KHELAWAN SAO SON OF DHURI SAO RESIDENT OF MOHALLA BARI PAHARI (MANSOOR NAGAR), P.S.- SOHSARAI, DISTRICTNALANDA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur For the State :

Mr. Awadhesh Kr. Singh For the informant : Mr. Ganesh Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 02-03-2021 Heard both sides.

The petitioner seeks bail in Sohsarai P.S. case No. 220/2019 registered u/s 302, 201/34 of the IPC. Dharmendra Kumar, the informant, is brother of the deceased. The informant disclosed that on 22.08.2019 one boy came to meet his younger brother, Ravi Kumar @ Dulla and after five minutes his brother went away along with that boy. His brother was having mobile No. 9060440755 but his brother did not return in the night. In the next morning the informant got information that a dead body is lying near sales tax office. The informant went there and identified dead body of his brother. The dead body was bearing injury on his right armpit which shows that his brother was killed by pointed and sharp edged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36993 of 2020(3) dt.02-03-2021 2/3 weapon.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner surfaced in the case in the confessional statement of co-accused Mukesh Kumar. Mukesh Kumar disclosed that petitioner was also accompanying him at the time of murder but the police did not collect any further material to show the involvement of the petitioner in the murder of the brother of the informant. Sahdeo Sao, father of Mukesh Kumar, has already been granted bail and the petitioner also deserves bail.

The learned APP as well as the learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but the learned counsel for the informant at the same time admits that save and except confessional statement of Mukesh Kumar no further tangible material is collected against the petitioner. On the basis of confessional statement of Mukesh Kumar one grill is said to have been recovered but grill does not connect the petitioner with the crime.

Having considered the facts that name of the petitioner surfaced in the case in the confessional statement of Mukesh Kumar before the police and on the basis of disclosure made by Mukesh Kumar in his confessional statement the police

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36993 of 2020(3) dt.02-03-2021 3/3 did not collect any further material to show the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged murder of brother of the informant and Sahdeo Sao, whose name also surfaced in the case in the confessional statement of Mukesh Kumar, has already been granted bail, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge- VINalanda at Biharsharif in connection with Sohsarai P.S. case No. 220/2019.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T