Deepak Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51202 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-233 Year-2024 Thana- MANER District- Patna ====================================================== Deepak Kumar, Son Of Vijay Singh @ Bhatani Singh Village- Sattar Sarai, Ps- Maner, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Arvind Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-11-2024
1. Heard Mr. Arvind Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Murli Dhar, learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Maner P.S. Case No. 233 of 2024, dated 08.04.2024, registered for the offences punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution, Pintu Kumar (informant) stated that on 08.04.2024 at about 4:00 A.M. he had given his son Rs. 70,000/- for buying materials from Marufganj, as soon as his son reached near a Pipal tree near his house he heard his son's cries and on reaching he saw accused persons Munna Singh, Deepak Kumar, Dinesh Kumar, Laxman Kumar and 2-3 unknown persons trying to snatch away the money from his son though he tired to save his son but the accused persons took
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51202 of 2024(4) dt.22-11-2024 2/3 away the money and accused Munna Singh and Deepak Kumar (petitioner) shot his son with their pistol due to which he died on the spot.
4. The main submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner are that the place of occurrence as shown in the FIR is totally false, in fact, the dead body of the deceased was found in a tempo with a firearm and in this regard statement of one witness mentioned in paragraph no. 10 of the case diary may be perused, in actual, the deceased committed suicide and petitioner has been falsely implicated in the alleged murder of the deceased.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner and submitted that the instant matter relates to murder committed by using firearm, petitioner is named in the FIR and against him there is direct allegation and the informant claimed to have seen the occurrence. Learned APP has also opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner and submits that against this petitioner, investigating is still pending.
6. Considering the seriousness of the allegation appearing against this petitioner from the FIR and he is said to be one of the assailants as per the FIR and against him the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51202 of 2024(4) dt.22-11-2024 3/3 investigation is still pending, in my opinion, it is not a fit case for bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer stands rejected. (Shailendra Singh, J) Rajiv/- U T