Pintoo Singh @ Pintu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57488 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2019 Thana- SAHAJITPUR District- Saran ====================================================== PINTOO SINGH @ PINTU SINGH Son of Surendra Singh Resident of Village - Najiba, P.S.- Sahajidpur, District- Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vipin Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pranav Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 06-02-2020 Heard the parties.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sahajitpur P.S.Case No.66 of 2019 registered for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per FIR, two other accused persons are said to have assaulted the deceased and so far this petitioner is concerned, it is stated that he along with one Chandan Singh assaulted by Farsa to one Sanjeev Kumar Singh. No allegation of assault to the deceased against the petitioner.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as a matter of fact Sanjeev Kumar Singh has received injury in an accident and he has been falsely implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57488 of 2019(4) dt.06-02-2020 2/2 case. There are several discrepancies, which have transpired during the investigation. He is in custody since 18.6.2019. Heard learned A.P.P. who has opposed the prayer for bail. on the ground that even injury of Sanjeev Kumar Singh has been found to be grievous in nature and does not appear to be of accident.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, however, once the charge has been framed against the petitioner, he is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U T