Ranjeet Kumar Singh @ Saurabh Kumar Singh @ Saurabh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24148 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -916 Year- 2015 Thana -SITAMARHI District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Ranjeet Kumar Singh @ Saurabh Kumar Singh @ Saurabh Singh S/O Brij Mohan Singh resident of Village Sonaul Sulgan P.S. Purnahiya District Sheohar.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party : Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 01-09-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 916 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant got information on his mobile that his son Chandan Kumar died and his dead body is lying in sadar hospital, Sitamarhi. The informant also disclosed that his son was having a mobile with double SIM bearing no. 9870142323 and 9973882263. Mr. Uday Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. It has come during course of investigation that Chandan Kumar had lent Rs. 50,000/- from Raushan Singh and there was some dispute between Chandan Kumar and Raushan Singh. The petitioner happens to maternal uncle of Raushan Singh and some of the witnesses disclosed that the petitioner used to

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24148 of 2016 (3) dt.01-09-2016 2/2 visit the room of the deceased with Raushan Singh before the occurrence. Save and except suspicion, there is no material on record to show the complicity of the petitioner in murder of Chandan Kumar. From perusal of the case diary, it appears that Mritunjay Kumar Singh has stated in para-36 of the case dairy that petitioner and Raushan Singh were talking with each other on the date of occurrence that Chandan Kumar is son of a rich man and the money would not be returned to him. The petitioner was also found in the company of Raushan Singh and they visited the room of the deceased along with other accused persons thereafter the dead body of the deceased was found in a field. Similar is the statement of Lallan Prasad and other witnesses. There appears that the petitioner was in the company of Raushan Singh.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above named on anticipatory bail in Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 916 of 2015, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) KKSINHA/- U T