Dismissed

Aditya Kumar @ Raushan Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Nov 2022CR. REV./54/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court declined a criminal revision seeking setting aside an order refusing bail. The court ruled that since the petitioner is the main assailant, the enquiry is nearing conclusion, and release would endanger his life, he must remain in protective custody.

What did the court decide?

Refusal to release the petitioner on bail; ordering that he be kept in protective custody.

Aditya Kumar @ Raushan Kumar Vs the State of… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA (FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL REVISION No.54 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2020 Thana- KHAGAUL District- Patna

¶3

====================================================== XXX S/o Prem Rai R/o village- Choti Badalpura, P.S.- Khagaul, DistrictPatna

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP ======================================================

¶6

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶7

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶8

4 11-11-2022

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md.

¶10

Aslam Ansari, learned APP for the State.

¶11

Petitioner in this case is seeking setting aside of the order dated 17.12.2021 passed by learned 1^st Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Juvenile Court, Patna in Criminal Appeal No. 97 of 2021 arising out of Khagaul P.S. Case No. 57 of 2020 whereby and whereunder the order refusing bail to the petitioner dated 15.07.2021 passed in J.J.B. Case No. 71 of 2021 arising out of Khagaul P.S. Case No. 57 of 2020 registered under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act has been affirmed.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of land dispute between the parties, the entire family of the petitioner had been made accused. The specific allegation of

¶13

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.54 of 2022(4) dt.11-11-2022 2/3

¶14

causing firing upon the chest of the deceased is against this petitioner. However, it is a case of false implication. The coaccused Rocky Kumar @ Rocky Yadav has been granted bail by a learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 59732 of 2022.

¶15

Mr. Aslam Ansari, learned APP for the State submits that as per report received from the learned Juvenile Justice Board, the enquiry itself is likely to be concluded within three months. It is his submission that since the petitioner is said to be the main assailant and he is likely to be tried as an adult being more than 16 years of age, his release at this stage would not be in the interest of justice and if released, the life of the petitioner may be exposed to danger.

¶16

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and having noticed that in the alleged occurrence, petitioner is said to be the main assailant and the enquiry itself is likely to be concluded within three months, this Court agrees with the submission of the learned APP for the State that release of the petitioner at this stage may expose him to the danger of his life and the interest of petitioner lies in keeping him in the protective custody. This Court, therefore, refuses to release the petitioner on bail at this stage.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.54 of 2022(4) dt.11-11-2022 3/3

¶18

Let the learned J.J.B. or the Children Court, as the case may be, conclude the enquiry/trial as early as possible and

¶19

preferably within the given period as indicated hereinabove.

¶20

This application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶21

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

lekhi/-

Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading ‘Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period’.

Aditya Kumar @ Raushan Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Kumar @ Raushan 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

Usha Devi Vs The State Of Bihar, Through The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna and Ors.

Kamlesh Kumar Kaushal Vs The State Of Bihar Through Principal Secretary, General Administration, Government Of Bihar, Patna

Gunja Devi @ Gunjan Soni @ Gunja Soni Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna and

Bimal Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Ratan Mukhiya @ Ratan Mukhiya Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Home Secretary Govt. Of Bihar, Patna and Ors.

Surendra Chaudhary Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Home Department Government Of Bihar, Patna and O