Santosh Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45642 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-247 Year-2022 Thana- KUTUMBA District- Aurangabad ====================================================== SANTOSH SINGH SON OF LATE RAJDEO SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- CHAPRA , PS- KUTUMBA, DISTT- AURANGABAD ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Jitendra Kumar Sagar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 04-08-2023 Heard the parties.
The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Kutumba P.S. Case No. 247 of 2022 instituted under under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code on 16.10.2022 by the informant, Raju Kumar Singh.
As per the prosecution story, the informant Raju Kumar Singh gave a written statement that his father Shambhu Singh was murdered with 'Farsa' by attacking on his head and body by the Santosh Singh who later escaped after throwing the 'Farsa'. Accordingly, the FIR.
The specific allegation is against the petitioner of killing the informant's father by 'Farsa'. Although, the learned counsel for the petitioner tried to show that for an occurrence of 16.10.2022, the petition is dated 16.11.2022, learned APP
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45642 of 2023(2) dt.04-08-2023 2/2 submits that this is minor mistake by the informant whose father was killed moments ago and as such he failed to inscribe 16.10.2022 instead of 16.11.2022 and has further drawn attention of this Court to the fact that not only it was registered on 16.10.2022, the A.C.J.M. has signed having seen the documents on 17.10.2022.
Being satisfied with the submission put forward by the learned APP and also that there has been specific allegation against the petitioner of killing the informant's father by 'Farsa', this is certainly not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail which is accordingly, rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T