Patna High Court rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail. The Court held that given the gravity of the murder charge and surrounding circumstances, it was not inclined to grant relief.
Rejected application for anticipatory bail.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15378 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2019 Thana- SONBERSA District- Saharsa
======================================================
RUPESH MEHTA Son of Jhalo Mehta @ Jhalo Singh Resident of Village - Barahi Tola Ranibasa, O.P. - Kash Nagar, P.S.- Sonbarsa Raj, District - Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bal Krishna Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nirmala Kumari ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER
3 10-10-2022
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Sonbarsa Raj P.S. Case no. 133 of 2019 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
It is a case of commission of murder of the uncle of the informant. As per allegation in the FIR, three accused persons had threatened to elder brother of the informant and demanded ransom by using force. It is further alleged that petitioner along with eleven named accused persons started firing which hit to Abhinash Kumar Singh on his chest and in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15378 of 2022(3) dt.10-10-2022 2/2
way to hospital, he succumbed to gun shot injury.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Petitioner is engineer and on the day of occurrence, he was at Hyderabad. He has got no criminal antecedent.
Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that during investigation several witnesses have supported the prosecution story. It is further submitted that process of Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. have already been issued and executed in the year 2019.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and, as such, his application for bail is rejected.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
sushma/- U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with a murder case involving multiple accused.
Whether the petitioner is liable to arrest given the apprehension of arrest by police.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Rupesh Mehta
The State of Bihar
Sunil Kumar Panwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
