Krishna Kumar Deepak v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77093 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1571 Year-2023 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Krishna Kumar Deepak Son of Uma Shankar Sharma Village- Saguni Rewan PS -Masaurhi Dist -Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pathak, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 1571 of 2023, registered for the offences punishable u/s 302/ 120(B)/ 34 of IPC and 25(1-B)a, 26/ 27/ 35 of Arms Act.

3.

As per prosecution case, two persons started firing in the parking area of a court campus. Both co-accused apprehended on the spot and two pistols and 8 live cartridge were recovered from their possession. Injured Kadi died during the treatment. 4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. No incriminating article was recovered from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner. He is not named in the FIR. He has been made accused on the basis of confessional statements of the co-accused person Nitish

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77093 of 2024(2) dt.13-11-2024 2/2 Kumar. As per confessional statement of co-accused Nitish Kumar, petitioner is involved in delivery of fire arms. It is further submitted that name of the petitioner was disclosed after 12 days. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para 3 of the bail application.

5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the confessional statement of the co-accused and has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court passed in the case of Indresh Kumar v/s The State of UP & Anr. wherein it is stated that the statements made under Section 161 Cr.P.C. may not be admissible in evidence, but are relevant in considering the prima facie case against an accused in an application for grant of bail in case of grave offence.

6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the confessional statement of co-accused, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected.

7.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) priyanka/- U T