Single judge dismissed the petitioner's regular bail application in a murder and loot case, holding that parity with co-accused was not sustainable due to new CCTV evidence and criminal antecedents.
Regular bail application dismissed; trial to be expedited.
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.41173 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-541 Year-2018 Thana- JAKKANPUR District- Patna
======================================================
ASHOK SINHA @ ASHOK KUMAR SINHA S/o Late Lala Hari Prasad Sinha R/o Village - Purandarpur, P.S. - Ekangr Sarai, District - Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Manoj, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER
3 21-04-2022
Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Manoj, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Umanath Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Jakkanpur PS Case No. 541 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363/365/420/379 of the IPC and later on Sections 328/392/302/201, 414/34 IPC were added.
The allegation in a nutshell is that the brother of the informant namely, Asok Sah arrived at Patna from Hyderabad, called up his wife at about 9:20 PM informing her that he was boarding at a bus at Meethapur Bus Stand but he did not reach his residence till late night, his mobile phone was found switched off and ultimately, his brother was found dead in a hospital and it was detected that from ATM Card of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41173 of 2021(3) dt.21-04-2022 2/3
deceased, money was withdrawn at Meethapur Bus Stand and purchase of gold jewelries was made at Biharsharif.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR is against unknown and the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case on the basis of confessional statement of one Sujeet Kumar who has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 4472/2020 (Annexure2). He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 24.06.2019 and the charge-sheet has been submitted. He next submits that there is contradiction in the statement recorded in the case diary i.e., in paragraphs 27 and 39.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the state, referring to the case diary, submits that the petitioner and other accused persons used ATM card of the deceased, Ashok Sah and while using the said ATM, the photograph of the petitioner and other accused persons were captured in CCTV footage of the jewelry shop. The accused persons purchased gold and other articles from jewelry shop at Biharsharif and on the basis of verification done by the technical cell of the Superintendent of Police, the petitioner was identified in the CCTV footage while using ATM in the jewelry shop. The deceased was killed by the accused persons with the purpose of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41173 of 2021(3) dt.21-04-2022 3/3
loot. Learned APP next submits that petitioner has got four criminal antecedents of similar nature.
Regards being had to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration particularly para-27 of the case diary where-from it appears that the petitioner was seen in the CCTV footage and was identified by the technical cell of the Superintendent of Police and this aspect of the matter was not brought to the notice while the bail application of the coaccused was being considered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Accordingly, parity claimed by the petitioner is not sustainable. Prima facie, evidence against the petitioner has come during course of investigation and the petitioner has got criminal antecedents of similar nature, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. The same is, hereby, dismissed.
Let the trial be expedited.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
perwez
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner in a murder and loot case.
Whether the parity claimed by the petitioner for co-accused is sustainable given omission of CCTV evidence before the co-ordinate bench.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Cr. Misc. No. 4472/2020Referred¶17
Ashok Sinha @ Ashok Kumar Sinha
The State of Bihar
Anil Kumar Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
