Disposed

Arjun Rai @ Arjun Ray v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC4 Jan 2024CR. MISC./74651/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application in a murder case where the petitioner allegedly joined others in an assault; specific firing allegation was against co-accused Mukesh Rai. Court granted bail citing custody period, submitted charge sheet, parity with bailed co-accused and absence of specific overt act, with conditions on attendance and non-tampering.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with bond of Rs.10,000/- and two like sureties before JM 1st Class, Vaishali at Hajipur, subject to three conditions including co-operation in trial and no tampering.

Arjun Rai @ Arjun 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.74651 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-313 Year-2022 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali

¶3

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

¶4

ARJUN RAI @ ARJUN RAY S/O GURU RAI R/O VILLAGEJAFARABAD DIH, P.S- RAGHOPUR, DISTT.- VAISHALI.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dr. Bipin Chandra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 04-01-2024

¶13

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

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 313 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120(B) and 34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶15

As per prosecution case, petitioner and others are said to have assaulted the cousin brother of the informant with lathi, farsa and sword and when the informant’s father came to rescue, it is alleged that petitioner and others surrounded him and it is further alleged that co-accused, Mukesh Rai, fired from his pistol which hit the head of the informant’s father as a result of which he succumbed to the said injury. It is further alleged that there is allegation of rangdari against the petitioner and others.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74651 of 2023(3) dt.04-01-2024 2/3

¶18

petitioner is in custody since 20.06.2023 and bears criminal antecedent of one case in which he is on bail. Learned counsel submits that charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. He further submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR. He further submits that allegation against the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature. The specific allegation is against co-accused ,Mukesh Rai, who is said to have fired from his pistol which hit the head of the informant’s father and the postmortem report also suggests that there is only one entry wound on the head of the deceased. In this way, petitioner is not in any way connected with the alleged occurrence. He further submits that co-accused Dev Charan Rai, Harvanshu Rai and Bilat Rai have already been granted bail vide Cr. Misc. No. 81036 of 2023, Cr.Misc. No. 17402 of 2023 and Cr.Misc. No. 20518 of 2023 respectively by the co-ordinate Benches of this Court and the case of present petitioner stands on similar footing.

¶19

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is allegation of rangdari against the petitioner and others.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence, coaccused have already been granted bail, there is no specific overt-act

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74651 of 2023(3) dt.04-01-2024 3/3

¶22

attributed against the petitioner, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1^st Class, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 313 of 2022, subject to following conditions:-

¶23

(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

¶24

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

¶25

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶26

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶27

vashudha/-

¶28

U T

Arjun Rai @ Arjun Ray v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Rai @ Arjun Ray 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

Sandeep Ojha Vs The State of Bihar

Arun Kumar @ Arun Kumar Mahton @ Arun Kumar Verma Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Bikash Kumar @ Bikky Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Sonu @ Osama Babu Vs The State of Bihar

Laxmi Ram Vs The State of Bihar