Prince Kumar @ Govind Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.14931 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -286 Year- 2014 Thana -GHOSI District- JEHANABAD ====================================================== Prince Kumar @ Govind Kumar Son of Anil Singh, Resident of Village - Shivdayal Bigha, P.S. Nawada, District - Nawada. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kr.Roy 1(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02/ 08-05-2015 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State.
The petitioner is languishing in custody since 23.10.2014 in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant's vehicle was hired by Tarun Kumar for leaving the petitioner and co-accused Vishnu Kumar to Jehanabad. On proceeding of vehicle subsequently Amt Kumar, Himanshu Ranjan and Sanjay Kumar boarded the vehicle on the way, subsequently Sanjay Kumar fired on the chest of the informant and all the accused persons escaped from the scene along with the Bolero vehicle.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14931 of 2015 (02) dt.08-05-2015 2/2 petitioner that the accusation of firing or taking the vehicle is not levelled against the petitioner. A statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and the investigation has already concluded.
Considering the fact that the petitioner was in association with others when the vehicle was robbed and the informant was shot at, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner in connection with Ghoshi P.S. Case No. 286 of 2014 pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.
However, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after remaining in custody for one year. (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) DKS/- U T