Amitesh Kumar @ Sikari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56431 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2022 Thana- BASANTPUR District- Siwan ====================================================== AMITESH KUMAR @ SIKARI Son of Yogendera Singh R/V- Basawan P.SBasantpur, Dist- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Harsh Anuj, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anita Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-03-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence under Sections 302, 307, 341, 323, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner along with other co-accused are alleged to have assaulted the informant and his family members. It is specifically alleged that the petitioner inflicted Dab on the head of elder brother of the informant as a result of which he sustained grievous injury and died.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. that the petitioner gave dab blow upon the head of the brother of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56431 of 2022(5) dt.17-03-2023 2/2 informant causing his death. He further submits that both the parties happen to be gotias and there was free fight between the parties in which both sides have got injured. He further submits that there was no intention to kille the brother of the informant. The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 31.03.2022. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct allegation of inflicting dab blow over the head of the brother of the informant causing his death and this fact has been supported by several witnesses whose statements have been recorded at paragraphs 7, 8, 9 of the case diary.

The postmortem report also corroborates with the allegation leveled in the F.I.R. against the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the direct allegation of assault against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of this petitioner is rejected.