Sujeet Kumar @ Munna Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58354 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2019 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran ====================================================== SUJEET KUMAR @ MUNNA KUMAR Son of Sri Harendra Sah @ Harendra Prasad Resident of Village-Pakaridayal, Ward No.7, P.S.- Pakaridayal, District-East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dashrath Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 27-11-2019 Heard Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Pakaridayal P. S. Case No. 118 of 2019 dated 16.05.2019 instituted for the offences under Sections 302, 307, 380, 120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant has alleged that when there was no response from inside the house by his wife and daughter, he scaled over the wall and reached inside the house, where he found his wife seriously injured. The

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58354 of 2019(3) dt.27-11-2019 2/3 daughter of the informant was also found injured but she was in her senses. She is said to have told the informant that the occurrence has been committed by one "Tuntun Uncle" who is one of the neighbours of the informant and his real name is Sumit Kumar @ Tuntun. The petitioner happens to be the elder brother of aforesaid Sumit Kumar @ Tuntun.

Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the source of information to the informant is his daughter, who too was injured. Later, in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which appears to be tutored one, she has taken the name of the petitioner also. In that event, the accusation against the petitioner does not appear to be correct.

He has further submitted that the motive for the occurrence is stated to be business rivalry whereas the informant has a business of selling edible goodies. However, considering the nature of accusation

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58354 of 2019(3) dt.27-11-2019 3/3 in the F.I.R. in which the wife of the informant died whereas his minor daughter was injured, who has taken the name of the petitioner in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner for the present.

The petition is dismissed.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) skm/- U