Dismissed

Raman Kumar Singh @ Mithu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC3 Apr 2014CR. MISC./42354/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Miscellaneous petition involved a bail application by the petitioner accused of murder, grievous hurt, and alleged possession of a firearm. The High Court, after hearing counsel, observed that the informant was not a direct eyewitness to the shooting. The court, considering the nature of the allegations which included murder and the use of a firearm, asserted it was not inclined to g

What did the court decide?

The prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. The court holds that it is not inclined to grant bail.

Raman Kumar Singh @ Mithu Singh Vs The State Of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42354 of 2013 (5) dt.03-04-2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶3

Criminal Miscellaneous No.42354 of 2013

¶4

====================================================== Raman Kumar Singh @ Mithu Singh, son of Dilip Kumar Singh, resident of Mohalla- Sunderpur, P.S.- Lalit Narayan Mithila University Police Station, District- Darbhanga.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER

¶6

5 03-04-2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶7

The petitioner is accused in connection with L.N.M.U. Police Station Case No. 88 of 2012 registered under Sections 324, 326, 307/34, 302 and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶8

The allegation of informant is that on 30.04.2012 in the morning, he was at temple and his uncle, Bajrangi Das, moved with cycle from there for Gym. He heard a sound of firing went that direction then saw that petitioner along with Kaushal Jha and Vikky Yadav were fleeing way and at that time this petitioner was armed with pistol and his uncle was lying injured pool with blood. His uncle disclosed that the petitioner shot fire on him, who died, in course of treatment.

¶9

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42354 of 2013 (5) dt.03-04-2014

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in fact, the informant is not the eye witness of the occurrence and the name of the petitioner has been disclosed mere on suspicion as just soon after the occurrence the petitioner and two others were seen fleeing away by the informant.

¶11

In the postmortem report, two injuries were corresponding to each other and one entry wound on the back of abdomen were found on the person of the deceased.

¶12

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

¶13

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)

¶14

Bhardwaj/-

Raman Kumar Singh @ Mithu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raman Kumar Singh @ Mithu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Toufique Alam Ansari Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar Sah @ Rajesh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Nitish Kumar @ Nithish Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Birja Yadav @ Birija Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Sanjay Singh yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Rakesh Mahto Vs The State Of Bihar