Suresh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19983 of 2018 (3) dt.03-05-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19983 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -302 Year- 2017 Thana -SAHEBGANJ District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Suresh Singh S/o Late Shyam Nath Singh, R/o Village- Chainpur Basatpur, P.S.- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bela Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 03-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is in custody since 29.10.2017 in connection with Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 302 of 2017 for the offence registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 324, 325, 307, 302 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Diary of the present case was called for which has since been received.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner. There is general and omnibus allegation against this petitioner.

Learned counsel for the State after perusal of the case

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19983 of 2018 (3) dt.03-05-2018 diary submits that the petitioner is one of the three persons who had assaulted the deceased and the cumulative effect of assault of the three persons resulting into the death of the victim. It is further submitted that there is land dispute between the parties and they had assaulted the deceased with an intention to kill. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation witnesses have supported the prosecution case.

Having considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. It is, accordingly, rejected.

However, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Anjana Mishra, J) Jagdish/- U T