Uttam Mishra @ Deepak Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1191 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2022 Thana- KOTWALI District- Munger ====================================================== UTTAM MISHRA @ DEEPAK MISHRA Son of Vikash Mishra R/VBasgarha, P.s- Kotwali, Dist- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajendra Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kotwali (Vasudeopur) P.S. Case No. 02 of 2022 dated 01.01.2022 registered for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner along with others F.I.R. named accused persons alleged to have opened fire upon the husband of the informant which hit near the ear of the deceased. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that according to the F.I.R., the petitioner opened fire upon the husband of the informant causing bullet injury near the ear of the deceased and other two accused persons have also fired upon the deceased. He further submits

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1191 of 2023(3) dt.19-05-2023 2/2 that the allegation of firing is attributed to the three accused including the petitioner but it is not specific that as to whom firing the deceased sustained deadly injury and died. He further submits that the police after investigation has submitted chargesheet in this case against the petitioner and there is no allegation of tampering with the evidences against the petitioner. The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 13.07.2022. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is specific/ direct allegation of firing upon the deceased against the petitioner causing him deadly injury. He further submits that postmortem report suggests that the deceased has got two bullet injuries which is sufficient to prove the prosecution version as alleged in the F.I.R.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the direct allegation of firing against the petitioner resulting into death of the husband of the informant, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of this petitioner is, hereby, rejected. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) brajesh/- U T