Ravish Paswan @ Rabo @ Ravish Kumar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69019 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2021 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger ====================================================== RAVISH PASWAN @ RABO @ RAVISH KUMAR PASWAN Son of Late Ramotar Paswan Resident of Village- Maniyarchak, Silha, Police StstionMuffasil, District- Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rabi Bhushan, Advocate Ms. Rakhi Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Akhileshwar Dayal, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 21-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Let the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from the date of resumption of physical filing and physical removal of defect. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 08 of 2021 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 364, 302, 201 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
As per prosecution case, the co-accused persons abducated the son of the informant and murdered him and the name of the petitioner transpired during the investigation as one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69019 of 2021(3) dt.21-09-2022 2/3 of the accused persons.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and he has been named in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Rahul Kumar. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from person or possession of this petitioner. There is delay in lodging the F.I.R. For an occurrence dated 04.01.2021, F.I.R has been lodged only on 07.01.2021 and there is no explanation for this delay. The informant is not an eye witness. There is no witnesses who might have seen the occurrence. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case and the petitioner is in custody since 03.03.2021.
Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant oppose the prayer for bail of the petitioner submitting that the name of the petitioner transpired during investigation. Learned counsel further submits that causing the death of the son of the informant has been accepted by the petitioner and other co-accused persons in their confessional statements. Learned counsel further submits that bail petition of co-accused Gyan Shankar Paswan has been rejected by this court vide order dated 13.07.2022 passed in Cr.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69019 of 2021(3) dt.21-09-2022 3/3 Misc. No. 52608 of 2021. Apart from, the co-accused Sunny Kumar whose bail was rejected by a Coordinate Bench vide order dated 21.03.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 44620 of 2022. Perused the records.
Having regard to the submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the facts and circumstances, at this stage, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, the prayer for grant of bail is rejected. The learned trial court has already been directed to expedite the trial vide order dated 21.03.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 44260 of 2021 and conclude the same within the period as mentioned in the aforesaid order.
If the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail, if so advised.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J) Gautam/- U T