Dismissed

Rishi Kumar @ Rishikesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC14 Dec 2020CR. MISC./27479/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the petitioner's bail application regarding multiple murder charges and Armed Force offenses. The Court held that evidence prima facie showed complicity and specific allegations of firing a fatal shot, corroborated by the postmortem report, made the prayer untenable.

What did the court decide?

The petition for regular bail has been dismissed.

Rishi Kumar @ Rishikesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27479 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2018 Thana- TEGHRHA District- Begusarai

¶3

======================================================

¶4

RISHI KUMAR @ RISHIKESH KUMAR Son of Nand Kishore Singh @ Nanhe, Resident of Village- Madhurapur, South Tola, P.S.- Teghara, DistrictBegusarai

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Braj Bhushan Poddar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 14-12-2020

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashok Kumar, the learned APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Teghara P.S. Case No. 29 of 2018, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 326/ 307/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶14

The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 26.01.2018 at about 11:20 AM., while the informant along with others was going to bring diesel from Sahu petrol pump, Teghra and had reached near the National high school Teghra, he

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27479 of 2020(3) dt.14-12-2020 2/4

¶16

saw 5-6 persons, armed with pistol, chasing his

¶17

son, Kunal Kumar and his friend, Gulshan Kumar. It is also alleged that the co-accused person, namely, Raman Kumar, the petitioner herein and the coaccused person, namely, Aman Kumar, were chasing the son of the informant. The co-accused person, Raman Kumar, is alleged to have fired upon the son of the informant, namely, Kunal Kumar, which had hit him on his chest, whereafter the petitioner and the co-accused person, namely, Rahul Kumar, had fired gunshots on the abdomen of the son of the informant, whereupon, the son of the informant fell down and died on the spot. Lastly, it is alleged that the co-accused person, namely, Aman Kumar, had also fired upon Gulshan Kumar, which had hit him on his ribs.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is languishing in custody since 12.12.2019. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the injured, Gulshan Kumar, in his

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27479 of 2020(3) dt.14-12-2020 3/4

¶20

statement made before the police, has stated that all the accused persons had fired gunshots on the deceased, hence, it is clear that a general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against the petitioner. Lastly, it is submitted that the coaccused person, namely, Aman kumar, has already been granted the privilege of bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.02.2020 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 11647 of 2020.

¶21

Per contra, the learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶22

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the materials available on record as also those available in the case diary, this Court finds that ample materials are available on record in the case diary to prima facie show the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged crime, apart from the fact that he has been specifically alleged to have fired gunshots in the abdomen of

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27479 of 2020(3) dt.14-12-2020 4/4

¶24

the deceased, which also stands corroborated from the postmortem report, hence, I do not find any merit in the present petition. As far as grant of bail to the co-accused person, namely, Aman Kumar, by a coordinate Bench of this Court, is concerned, he has not been alleged to have fired gunshots on the deceased, hence his case is clearly distinguishable from that of the petitioner. Consequently, I do not find any merit in the present petition especially since the petitioner has been alleged to have engaged in committing the murder of the son of the informant, hence, the present petition stands dismissed.

¶25

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)

¶26

Ajay/-

¶27

U T

Rishi Kumar @ Rishikesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishi Kumar @ Rishikesh Kumar 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

Ranjan Kumar Singh @ Ranbir Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Rambalak Yadav @ Karu Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Tudu Vs the State of Bihar

Binod Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Hariom Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Kundan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar