Patna High CourtCR. MISC./48491/2023rejected

Md. Karmul @ Karmul v. The State Of Bihar

2023-10-11Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48491 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-173 Year-2022 Thana- BHAPTIAHI District- Supaul ====================================================== Md. Karmul @ Karmul Son Of Oli Mohammad Resident Of Village - Chhitahi, Ward No. 10, Ps- Bhaptiyahi, Distt- Supaul. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Nafisuzzoha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Fahimuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 11-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 307, and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner along with others is of killing the son of the informant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. He submitted that the Postmortem report does not support the prosecution case. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 15.03.2023.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for bail and submitted that petitioner is named in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48491 of 2023(4) dt.11-10-2023 2/2 FIR and there is specific overt act of assaulting by means of Farsa upon the head of the deceased against the petitioner and the others co-accused assaulted by means of sword due to which, he succumbed to injury. The Postmortem report has also supported the prosecution case in respect of the death of the deceased. During investigation several witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

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