High Court rejected bail application filed by Ajeet Kumar Singh charged under IPC 302, 307 and Arms Act. Court noted severe alleged involvement in shooting a deceased and increased antecedents from three to five, declining to grant privilege of bail.
Bail application rejected; petitioner required to remain in judicial custody.
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.16336 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2021 Thana- MATIHANI District- Begusarai
======================================================
AJEET KUMAR SINGH, Son of Late Narayan Singh Resident of Village - Sonapur Dih, P.O. and P.S. - Nayagaon, District - Begusarai, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Y.V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr.Vikas Ratan Bharti, Adv. For the informant : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 29-08-2022
Heard Mr. Y.V. Giri, learned Senior Counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel who represents the informant and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.
Let the defect(s) be removed within four weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course.
The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Matihani P.S. Case No.151 of 2021 instituted under Sections 307, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.
As per the allegation in the FIR, the informant has alleged that he along with his son Kunal Kumar @ Dillu (deceased) and two others were moving on two motorcycles for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16336 of 2022(3) dt.29-08-2022 2/3
distribution of cards in connection with marriage in the family. It is alleged that when they reached near Bhawanandpur, suddenly Gulshan Kumar, Vivek Kumar, Ajeet Kumar Singh (the petitioner herein) as also Mukesh Kumar interecepted them and thereafter it is alleged that not only the petitioner exhorted the others, he actually opened fire on his son Kunal Kumar who was injured and died instantly. Further allegation is that when Murari Singh tried to escape, one Vivek Kumar also opened fire. They later fled away on motorcycles.
The reason behind this incident has been alleged to be Panchayat Election during which his son had dispute with the accused persons after which he was threatened of dire consequence.
Learned Senior Counsel submits that the incident is of 29.11.2021 at 01:00 PM but the FIR has been lodged on 30.11.2021 in the evening and there is nothing on record or in the FIR to explain the said delay. He further submits that a perusal of case diary and the statement made by Murari Singh who was pillion rider with the deceased shows slightly different version from what has been alleged in the FIR.
Per contra, Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the informant submits that postmortem report shows
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16336 of 2022(3) dt.29-08-2022 3/3
that three gun shot injuries have been found on the person of the deceased and as such the petitioner herein cannot escape the allegations that has come in the FIR.
Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP on the other hand submits that contrary to the statement made in para-3 of the bail application that the petitioner has three criminal antecedent, as per the report vide memo no.1058/2022 dated 05.08.2022, the petitioner actually has five criminal antecedents.
Taking into account the fact that the specific allegation has been made against the petitioner of opening fire causing immediate death of the son of the informant as also that he has five criminal antecedents, this Court is not inclined to grant him privilege of bail, which is accordingly rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Prakash Narayan /- U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in connection with murder and attempt to murder charges.
Whether the presence of five criminal antecedents precludes the grant of bail despite the gravity of the allegations.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ajeet Kumar Singh
The State of Bihar
Rajiv Roy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
