Manoj Tanti @ Manoj Kumar Tanti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.16140 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2017 Thana- BAKHRI District- Begusarai ====================================================== Manoj Tanti @ Manoj Kumar Tanti, Son of Arjun Tanti, Resident of VillageParihara, P.S.- Bakhri, District- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajeet Kumar Ojha, Advocate For the State :

Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP For the informant :

Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned APP for the State as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

Petitioner, already in custody, seeks bail in connection with Bakhri P.S. Case No. 98 of 2017 registered under Sections 302 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation in brief is that the informant's brother was ambushed by the FIR named accused person while he reached at his house in the village and it is alleged that the petitioner also shot at the chest of the deceased and the informant is said to be the eye witness.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the wife of the petitioner was elected Mukhiya in the year 2011 and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16140 of 2018(6) dt.11-07-2018 2/2 defeated the wife of the informant and on account of political rivalry falsely implicated in this case, the informant is himself a man of criminal background though he is a lawyer but against him more than thirty cases are pending and the case of the prosecution is highly improbable, the informant claiming himself as eye witness to the occurrence moreover the deceased was also man of criminal background and killed by unknown criminals.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that there is specific accusation against the petitioner of killing the deceased by shooting at his chest and corresponding injuries have been found and petitioner has got several criminal antecedents and other witnesses have also supported the case. Having considered the specific accusation against the petitioner and the nature of offence, the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Arun Kumar, J) S.KUMAR/- U T