Pawan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7517 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2020 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna ====================================================== PAWAN KUMAR, Son of Late Bijendra Prasad @ Bijendra Yadav, Resident of Village - Dhamaul, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, Dist.- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kr. Thakur, Adv.

: Mr.Vaishnavi Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Navin Kr. Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 18-08-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual Court proceedings. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The prosecution case, in brief is that on 27.05.2020 in the evening, the informant heard the hulla that his son Pintu Kumar @ Chote, who has gone to take Johnson powder for his child, was killed by two unknown persons by firing, who had come to motorcycle and fled away.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. On the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7517 of 2021(3) dt.18-08-2021 2/2 petitioner has been made accused in this case. There is no any incriminating articles has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. On the confessional statement of co-accused, the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence. The petitioner is in jail custody since 02.06.2020. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent which is mentioned in para 3 of the bail petition Charge sheet has been submitted in this case.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail petition and submits that as per case diary there is specific allegation against the petitioner.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected in connection with Punpun P.S. Case No. 132/2020 from the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Masaurhi.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

However, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of the charge.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) amitkumar/- U T