Dismissed

Sipahi Ray v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC21 Jun 2024CR. MISC./7056/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application in a murder case arising from firing on the informant's son. The court noted a specific allegation that the petitioner fired from a rifle causing death, declined to grant bail and directed the trial court to conclude the trial within one year.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sipahi Ray Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7056 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2022 Thana- SALIMPUR District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Sipahi Ray Son of late Ramagya Ray Resident of Village-Satgharba, Kaladiara, P.S.-Salimpur, Distt.-Patna

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gyanendra Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER

¶11

5 21-06-2024

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P for the State.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Salimpur P.S. Case No. 256 of 2022 dated 22.11.2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 342, 324, 302, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶14

The prosecution case, in short, is that on 22.11.2022 at about 07:45 am, the informant’s son namely, Sonu was ready for going to school, the informant was standing near his door and saw all the accused persons surrounded his son and Sipahi Ray and Jawahar Ray were armed with Rifles. The informant shouted and said his son to flee away but in the meantime, Sipahi Ray fired from his Rifle on the son of the informant who

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7056 of 2024(5) dt.21-06-2024 2/3

¶16

received bullet injury on the left side of his armpit. Subsequently, he fell down and died.

¶17

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that from the bare perusal of the postmortem report of the deceased, it is evident that the wound of the entry and exit has been caused by pistol not by the rifle. It is further submitted that petitioner has been implicated falsely so that he may give up his claim over the land in dispute with the informant and his family. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 27.09.2023, having six criminal cases against him and charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

¶18

Learned counsel for the informant submits that as per the F.I.R., Sipahi Ray fired from his rifle on the son of the informant, who received the bullet injury and allegation of firing is also against co-accused namely, Jawahar Ray. Learned counsel further submitted that there is a specific allegation against Sipahi Ray. The injury sustained by the deceased is as follows:-

¶19

(i). Entry wound of bullet – 2'' below the left armpit size ½'' in diameter.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7056 of 2024(5) dt.21-06-2024 3/3

¶21

(ii). Exit wound of bullet – 2 ½'' below the right armpit size 1 ¼'' in diameter.

¶22

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. He submits that injury report of the deceased according to post-mortem report seems to be grievous in nature and the death of the deceased is caused by firearm injuries.

¶23

Since there is specific allegation against the petitioner of firing from his rifle on the son of the informant which caused his death, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶24

Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail is rejected .

¶25

The learned Trial Court is directed to take all endeavour to conclude the trial within one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournment.

¶26

This application stands dismissed.

¶27

(Khatim Reza, J)

¶28

prabhat/-

Sipahi Ray v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sipahi Ray v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chhotu Kumar @ Bauna Vs The State of Bihar

Gorelal Yadav @ Gorelal @ Dharmendra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Gender Sahani @ Gyanendra Sahani @ Gendar Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Gulam Sarwar @ Md. Gulam Sarwar @ Gulam Sarbar @ Md. Manan Rashid Vs The State of Bihar

Gunjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Binay Kumar Vs Dr. Shankar Nath