IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70956 of 2021

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2021 Thana- BALTHAR District- West Champaran

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

SAHEB SAH @ ABHAY KUMAR Son of Musai Sah Resident of village -

Murali, P.S.- Balthar, District - West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr.Umesh Chandra Verma

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar, APP

For the informant

:

Mr. Sanjeev

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA

ORAL ORDER

2

05-05-2022

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the

learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

offences under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is in custody since 16.03.2021, he is a person with

clean antecedent, charge-sheet has been submitted and is a

young boy of 21 years of age and the informant alleges that his

son had gone to see a fair where a dance programme was going

on, further his son sat in the front to see the programme where

his uncle also sat, further during programme, the petitioner who

is a friend of his son called him and both went somewhere,

further his son did not return in the night and in the next

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70956 of 2021(2) dt.05-05-2022

2/4

morning when informant started searching, he came to know

that a dead body was thrown in Lakhaura area, accordingly the

informant reached the place of occurrence and found his son

dead body, thus alleges that on account of previous dispute as

mentioned in the FIR, the named accused persons called his son

through the petitioner and killed him.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, the

informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence, the entire

allegation hinges around suspicion, it is also submitted that

admittedly from the FIR, it can be culled out that the uncle of

the deceased was sitting near the deceased and he saw the

petitioner asking the deceased to accompany him on account of

which the deceased left with petitioner, it is submitted that since

the uncle had seen and if he had any apprehension that the

petitioner might commit an occurrence with the deceased then

definitely he along with informant would have searched the

deceased when he did not return home in the night but from

perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., it would

manifest that neither the informant nor his brother had any

apprehension that deceased accompanied the petitioner and as

such they did not search the deceased during the night and in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70956 of 2021(2) dt.05-05-2022

3/4

next morning they came to know that dead body of the deceased

was found. The learned counsel submits that even presuming

what has been alleged is true without admitting for the purpose

of bail then the allegation against this petitioner is of calling the

deceased who accompanied him and thereafter it is alleged that

the accused person on account of enmity as detailed in the FIR

committed the occurrence, the learned counsel submits that

during the course of investigation, it came that one Deepak was

arrested who disclosed that the mobile of the deceased was

given by the petitioner to him based on which the petitioner got

connected with the offence. Further, he disclosed that the

deceased along with Deepak, petitioner and other co-accused

were feasting when some altercation took place based on which

this petitioner strangulated the deceased. The learned counsel

submits that the confession of Deepak is self exculpatory and as

such does not have any evidentiary value. Learne