Patna High CourtCR. MISC./28721/2018rejected

Gautam Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2018-05-09Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.28721 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -66 Year- 2017 Thana -GHOSBARI District- PATNA ====================================================== Gautam Paswan son of Nagina Paswan, @ Nagina Paswan, R/o VillageSamachak, P.S. Barbigha, Sheikhpura. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Chaudhary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mr. Manoj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Ghoswari P.S. Case No.66 of 2017 registered for the offences under Sections 302, 120(B), 201, 34 of the I.P.C. Accusation of the informant, Bhola Yadav is that in the evening of 15.10.2017 his brother Shashi Bhushan Yadav having cash of Rs.1,50,000/- moved with Ramu Paswan boarding on motor cycle but he did not return and his mobile was found also switched off and in that course one Ranjit Yadav informed Ghoswari Police Station about throwing of a dead body in the field near Mokamah Sarmera N.H.52. Thereafter he went there and identified the dead body of his brother Shashi Bhushan Yadav. He suspected that in conspiracy Ramu Paswan, Sagar Yadav, Ramotar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28721 of 2018 (2) dt.09-05-2018 2/2 Yadav, Shishupal Kumar @ Chhuti, Sube Yadav, Bhuwaneshwar Yadav have committed murder of his brother and concealed the dead body.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that in course of investigation name of the petitioner has come in this case on the basis of confessional statement of coaccused, Ramu Paswan and except that there is nothing against the petitioner.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail which shall be considered on its own merit and without being prejudiced by this order. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) AnilKrSinha/- U