Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 599 Patna
Judgement Date : 3 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32234 of 2020
Arising Out of PS Case No.-82 Year-2020 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
======================================================
Parmeshwar Kumar, aged about 28 years, Son of Late Ram Bachhan Rai, Resident of- Digha, Patipool, PS- Digha, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 03-02-2021
The matter has been heard via video conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.
3. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Digha
(Patna) PS Case No. 82 of 2020 dated 13.02.2020, instituted under
Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act,
1959.
4. The allegation against the petitioner, though not
named in the FIR, is of being involved in killing of the son of the
informant.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is
innocent and has no connection with the crime and has been made
an accused only in the confessional statement of co-accused Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32234 of 2020 dt.03-02-2021
Santosh Kumar, who had fired on the deceased, but there is no
link between the petitioner and the said Santosh Kumar. It was
submitted that Santosh Kumar is on inimical terms with the
petitioner as he had ordered supply of building material from the
shop of the petitioner and had not paid Rs. 1,10,000/-, for which
there was hot talk on telephone between the two. Learned counsel
submitted that the petitioner is not the assailant and is in custody
since 18.02.2020.
6. Learned APP, from the case diary, submitted that co-
accused, Santosh Kumar, who has been identified on the CCTV
has stated that it was the petitioner who had promised to pay Rs. 4
lakhs for killing the deceased. It was submitted that witnesses
have also supported such allegation.
7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the
case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court
is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, for the present.
8. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)
P. Kumar
AFR/NAFR U T
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!