A criminal miscellaneous matter where the petitioner sought anticipatory bail in the murder case. The High Court rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail, refusing to enlarge the petitioner on 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.28724 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2022 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran
====================================================== DEEPAK PANDEY SON OF DHARAMNATH PANDEY @ BHOLI PANDEY R/O VILLAGE- TALIMPUR, P.S.- MADHUBAN, DISTRICTEAST CHAMPARAN
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
| THE STATE OF BIHAR ==================== |
... ... Opposite Party/s ================================== |
|---|---|
| Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ==================== |
Mr.S.K. Lal, Adv. Mr.Ajay Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr.H.A. Khan, APP ================================== |
| CORAM: HONOURABL | E MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER |
3 20-10-2022
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Pipra Kothi P.S. Case No.83/2022, registered for the offence punishable u/s 302, 201, 120-B, 34 of the IPC.
Allegedly, all the F.I.R. named accused persons under a conspiracy have committed murder of informant’s brother Mumtaz Alam and his friend Mithun Kumar Malo and threw their dead body near Mohanapul, Pipra Kothi.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28724 of 2022(3) dt.20-10-2022 2/2
taken place. There is no specific overt act against the petitioner rather the allegation is general and omnibus in nature. There is no eye-witness to the alleged occurrence and only on suspicion, petitioner has been made accused in this case. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that on the confessional statement of the co-accused petitioner has been made accused in this case and he is one of the assailant in the alleged offence.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on their behalf is hereby rejected.
This application is accordingly dismissed.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)
pallavi/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to grant of anticipatory bail in connection with the offences under Sections 302, 201, 120-B, 34 of IPC.
Whether the nature of allegations constitutes a prima facie case against the petitioner for anticipatory bail.
Deepak Pandey
The State of Bihar
Anjani Kumar Sharan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
