Tuntun Kunwar @ Nun Roti v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3562 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2023 Thana- MATIHANI District- Begusarai ====================================================== Tuntun Kunwar @ Nun Roti Son of Late Sahdev Kunwar, Resident of Village- Shankarpur Bhakhadda, P.S.- Matihani, Distt- Begusarai. ... ... Appellant
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar.
2.
Shabnam Devi Past Wife of Bhramdev Paswan, R/o Vill.- Kadhagola Rauniya, P.S.- Barari, Dist.- Katihar. Presently Wife of Ramphul Paswan, R/o Vill.- Damar Kothi, P.S.- Parbatta, Dist.- Khagaria. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Sarvottam Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant and the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the rejection of prayer for bail vide order dated 18.05.2024 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST (PoA) Act, Begusarai in connection with Matihani P.S. Case No. 145 of 2023 dated 29.09.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code, under Section 27 and 25(1b-a)26 of the Arms Act and also under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3562 of 2024(6) dt.10-04-2025 2/3 SC/ST (PoA) Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the son of informant namely, Ramesh Paswan was shot dead by the appellant when he went to the house of the appellant for taking the due amount.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel next submitted that there is no eyewitness to the alleged occurrence and the appellant has been implicated in the present case merely on the basis of suspicion. Learned counsel has further submitted that as per FIR, no member of public was present at the relevant point of time of the alleged incident, hence no case is made out under SC/ST Act. The appellant has one criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition. The appellant is in custody since 30.09.2023.
5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail of the appellant and submitted that it has come in the paragraph no. 29 of the case diary that the appellant has confessed his guilt and one katta and three cartridges have also been recovered from his house and there is specific allegation of firing attributed against the appellant.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3562 of 2024(6) dt.10-04-2025 3/3
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the specific and heinous nature of allegation against the appellant, I am not inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 18.05.2024 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST (PoA) Act, Begusarai, in connection with Matihani P.S. Case No. 145 of 2023 and accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellant is rejected.
7. The learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial of the appellant at the earliest.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Shahnawaz/- U T