Dismissed¶27

Kunal Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC12 Jul 2024CR. APP (SJ)/245/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, CR. APP (SJ) No.245 of 2024, decided 12-07-2024 by Justice Jitendra Kumar; Kunal Kumar vs State of Bihar and Vivek Kumar; bail appeal dismissed; offences under IPC Sections 341, 323, 379, 307, 504, 506, 447/34, SC/ST Act Sections 3(i)(r)(s)/2(va) and Arms Act Section 27; firing on informant at appellant's order causing death; custody since 16.01.2022; charge not framed; six criminal antecedents; direction to conclude trial within six months with liberty to renew bail.

What did the court decide?

None — bail refused. Trial court directed to expedite and conclude the trial within six months, failing which the appellant may renew his bail prayer. ¶27

Kunal Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.245 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-553 Year-2021 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Kunal Kumar S/O Late Diwakar Singh Village- Dilawarpur Goverdhan, P.S.Bidupur, Dist. Vaishali.

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Vivek Kumar S/O Late Rana Sharma Village- Pananpur Dilwarpur, P.S.Bidupur, Dist. Vaishali.

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

======================================================

¶11

Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Ms. Sagrika, Advocate For the State : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. P.P. ======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶13

5 12-07-2024

¶14

Heard Ld. counsel for the appellant and Ld. Special

¶15

Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶16

This criminal appeal has been filed to enlarge the appellant on bail, impugning the order dated 19.12.2023, passed by Ld. Exclusive Special Judge SC/ST Act-cum-Addl. Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Bidupur P.S. Case No. 553 of 2021 dated 11.11.2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 379, 307, 504, 506 and 447/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3(i)(r)(s)/2(va) of SC/ST Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act, whereby bail of the

¶17

appellant has been rejected.

¶18

The prosecution case as emerging from the FIR is

¶19

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.245 of 2024(5) dt.12-07-2024 2/3

¶20

that on 10.11.2021 at about 10.45 P.M. all the accused persons including the appellant came at the house of the informant, started abusing him by taking his caste name and also assaulted his uncle, namely, Chnadrawali Sharma and when the informant came to save his uncle, co-accused Raju Singh, on the order of the appellant, fired at the informant, resulting into his death.

¶21

Ld. counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the appellant has been implicated in this case on account of enmity, as the wife of the appellant has contested panchayat election. He further submits that the appellant has been in jail since 16.01.2022. He also submits that the trial is not proceeding till date, even charge has not been framed.

¶22

It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the appeal that the appellant has six criminal antecedents.

¶23

However, Ld. Special Public Prosecutor for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the appellant for bail submitting that the alleged offence is serious in nature. It is the appellant on whose order co-accused Raju Singh has caused fire arm injury to the victim (informant) which ultimately resulted into his death. As such, the Appellant does not deserve to be

¶24

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.245 of 2024(5) dt.12-07-2024 3/3

¶25

enlarged on bail.

¶26

Considering the nature of allegation, I am not persuaded to enlarge the Appellant on bail. Hence, I find that there is no illegality or impropriety in the impugned order dated 19.12.2023 passed in Bidupur P.S. Case No. 553 of 2021.

¶27

Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed.

¶28

However, Ld. Trial Court is directed to expedite the

¶29

trial and conclude the same within six months. If the trial is not concluded within the stipulated time, the appellant will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

¶30

(Jitendra Kumar, J.)

¶31

ravishankar/S.Ali-

Kunal Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunal Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surendra Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Mahatab @ Golki Vs The State of Bihar

Punam Devi @ Chulbul Devi @ Gulbul Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Kamdeo Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Umesh Yadav @ Umesh Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Kumar Gupta Vs The State of Bihar