Ram Darshan Ray @ Kanhaiya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40143 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2022 Thana- PATORI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Ram Darshan Ray @ Kanhaiya Son Of Late Shyam Sundar Ray R/O VillageTajpur (HADAI), P.S.- Patori, District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 10-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Informant, learned APP for the State and perused the case diary.

The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 302, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Allegedly, it is a case of shot fire upon the husband of the informant, namely, Shambhu Prasad (deceased) by the petitioner and other accused persons due to which he died.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the informant is claiming herself to be an eye witness and made specific allegation against the petitioner to be the main assailant but during the course of investigation, one Manish Kumar @ Meghnath was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40143 of 2022(3) dt.10-01-2023 2/2 arrested in connection with Patori P.S. Case No. 48 of 2022 and made his confessional statement before the police that he fired on the deceased by his pistol, due to which the deceased died. Petitioner is in judicial custody since 10.02.2022.

Learned APP appearing for the State as well as the Informant have opposed the prayer for regular bail and submitted that there is direct allegation of shot fire upon the deceased due to which he received gun shot injury. During investigation, witnesses have supported the prosecution case. The Postmortem report also supported the case of the prosecution and the doctor opined the cause of death is due to haemorrhage and shock and injury caused by firearm. According to the postmortem report, one bullet was recovered from the brain of the deceased.

After considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is rejected. However, the trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T