Murari Kumar @ Raja Kumar @ Pintu @ Chintu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.920 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2019 Thana- BARHIYA District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== MURARI KUMAR @ RAJA KUMAR @ PINTU @ CHINTU Son of Chandramauli Singh @ Chandra Mauleshwar Singh Resident of Village - Jaitpur, P.S.- Barahiya, District - Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mukesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 4.

05-06-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This application for regular bail arises out of Barahiya P.S. Case No. 16 of 2019 disclosing offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

It is alleged in the First Information Report that the informant's son was driving a truck when he noticed a motorcyclist rashly driving his motorcycle. When he stopped his vehicle and requested the motorcyclist be careful, he was assaulted and subsequently he was killed by the said unknown persons.

The petitioner's name transpired in course of investigation. The petitioner was subsequently apprehended, who is said to have confessed his guilt before the police. It

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.920 of 2020(4) dt.05-06-2020 2/2 transpires from the statement made in paragraph 3 of the application that the petitioner has following criminal antecedents:- "(i) Barahiya P.S. Case No.

339/18 U/s 147,148,149,160,385,387/34 IPC, in which petitioner is on bail.

(ii) Barahiya P.S. Case No.

59/19, U/s 302,201,120B/34 IPC and U/s 27 Arms Act ( Not named in FIR).

(iii) Barahiya P.S. Case No.

284/19 under sections 25(1-B), 25,35 of the Arms Act, petitioner is on bail"

Considering the materials available in the case diary and the petitioner's criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to grant him privilege of regular bail for the present. This application is rejected.

The petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail, if the case is not committed for trial within six months. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) arun/- U