AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
19 paragraphs · 339 wordsThe matter has been heard via video conferencing.
Heard Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘APP’) for the State.
The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Muffasil PS Case No.296 of 2019 dated 03.07.2019 instituted under Sections 302, 201, 120-B,
379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The allegation against the petitioner is that he, along with three other persons, had called the husband of the informant on the plea that co-accused,
Sukhdeo Bhai and Kanhaiya Bhai had called him and thereafter his dead body was recovered the next morning.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the deceased had inimical terms with co-accused Sukhdeo Bhai and Kanhaiya Bhai and he had no
role in the said dispute and there was no occasion for him to go and call the husband. Further, it was submitted that there is also no motive for him to
kill the husband of the informant. Learned counsel submitted that co-accused, Subhash Prasad @ Subash Prasad has been granted bail by a co-
ordinate Bench by order dated 05.03.2020 in Cr. Misc. No.72693 of 2020.
Learned APP submitted that there is no reason for the informant to falsely implicate the petitioner as no instance of there being inimical terms has
been shown. Further, it was submitted that the petitioner being one of the persons, who had called the deceased in the evening and next morning his
body being recovered, obviously, cannot be said to be totally ignorant of what happened and the death had also occurred by cutting the neck of the
deceased. Learned counsel submitted that co-accused, Subhash Prasad @ Subash Prasad, has been granted regular bail after being in custody for
nearly eight months.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to grant pre-
arrest bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
