Monu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73985 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2023 Thana- DHANARUA District- Patna ====================================================== Monu Kumar Son Of Sri Mahashankar Prasad R/O Village - Sahopur, P.S.- Kadirganj, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Ms.Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate Mr. ritwik Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-02-2024 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur and learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad along with learned counsel for the OP No. 2. 2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Dhanarua PS Case No. 189 of 2023 dated 17-4-2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The learned counsel for the OP No. 2 submits that the offence appears to be heinous as the informant alleges that his son was killed and the FIR was against unknown, but during the course of investigation, the police arrested one Vikas Kumar, who in his confession disclosed the name of the petitioner that he was also involved in the occurrence, further one Prince

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73985 of 2023(3) dt.22-02-2024 2/2 Kumar was also arrested and based on his confession, the slipper and T-shirt of the deceased were recovered. It is further submitted that since the name of the petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of Vikas Kumar that he was also involved in the occurrence and slipper and T-shirt of the deceased were recovered at the instance of Prince Kumar, as such it manifests that the police is investigating the case in its correct perspective. It is also submitted that the investigation is still going on.

4.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and confession is a weak defence on which the learned counsel for the OP No. 2 submits that since the case is under investigation as such the court should be reluctant in interfering at this stage.

5.

Considering the submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of OP No. 2, the court is not inclined to entertain the anticipatory bail application and the same is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T