The Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner in a murder case arising from PIEP.P.S. Case No. 22/2016. The court noted discrepancies in FIR lodging time and the delayed claiming of eyewitness status by family members.
Enlargement on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11147 of 2017 (3) dt.04-04-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.11147 of 2017
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -22 Year- 2016 Thana -PIPRIYA SAHAYAK District- LAKHISARAI
====================================================== UTPAL KANT KUMAR @KARU @ RAJAN SINGH, Son of Ram Badan Singh, Resident of Village- Laldiyara, P.S.- Pipariya, District- Lakhisarai.
.... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Bachan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER
3 04-04-2017 Heard both sides.
The petitioner seeks bail in Pipariya P.S. Case No. 22/2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Sarawan Kumar Sharma brother of the deceased Surendra Kumar Sharma alleged that about 7.30 in the evening on 11.06.2016 while his brother Surendra Kumar Sharma was returning unknown persons shot him dead and took out his mobile, money.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the brother of the informant lodged the case for killing of his brother against unknown. There was no eye-witness of the occurrence, but on the next day when the police took the statements of the wife,
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11147 of 2017 (3) dt.04-04-2017
and nephew of the deceased, they claimed themselves to be the eye-witness of the occurrence. If the wife and nephew were the eye-witness of the occurrence they would have come just after the occurrence, but the brother came and lodged the case against unknown. It is further alleged that on the next day further statement of the informant was also recorded and he also claimed to be the eye-witness of the occurrence.
It appears that the occurrence took place at 7.30 in the evening and the F.I.R. was lodged at about 11.30 in the night after four hours of the occurrence, but neither the informant nor any family members came forward to say that they saw the occurrence with their own eyes, but on the next day, the wife and other family member claimed to be the eye-witness of the occurrence and narrated the occurrence.
Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Lakhisarai in connection with Pipariya P.S. Case No. 22/2016.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.)
Vinita/U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in the criminal case registered for murder and other offences.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Utupal Kant Kumar
The State of Bihar
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
