Bhim Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53916 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-586 Year-2021 Thana- CHAPRA TOWN District- Saran ====================================================== Bhim Kumar S/O Late Bhagwan Prasad @ Bhagwan Sah R/O Mohalla- Uttari Dahiyawan Tola, Ps. Chapra Town, Dist. Saran At Chapra ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jeetendra Narayan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 20-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under section 363 of the Indian Penal Code later on Section 364 of the IPC was also added.

3. As per FIR, the informant alleged that his son has been abducted and his motorcycle has been recovered besides Vivek Hotel situated at Saran Academy Railway.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The petitioner is not named in the FIR and merely on the basis of suspicion he has falsely been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53916 of 2023(4) dt.20-12-2023 2/2 implicated in this present case. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 07.11.2022.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of Bail and submitted the petitioner in connivance with others committed murder of the informant's son. During investigation, the petitioner was arrested and confessed his guilt and at the instance of confessional statement of this petitioner, one knife was recovered which was used in this alleged occurrence which is mentioned at Para-158 of the Supplementary Case Diary.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstance of the of the case, 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 expedite and conclude the trial within its stipulated period of time i.e. six months which is mentioned in its report, failing which the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

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