Patna High Court - Orders
Uma Shankar Rai @ Sipahi Rai @ Uma Shankar ... vs The State Of Bihar on 2 February, 2018
Author: Mohit Kumar Shah
Bench: Mohit Kumar Shah
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.57412 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-526 Year-2016 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna
======================================================
UMA SHANKAR RAI @ SIPAHI RAI @ UMA SHANKAR SINGH
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Babita Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. SMT. ASHA DEVI
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
ORAL ORDER
5 02-02-2018Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Bihta P.S. Case No. 526 of 2016 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 394, 324, 302, 342, 364, 201 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 31.07.2016 at about 12 hours the uncle of the informant, namely, Pramod Pandey went at his land at Pachrukhiya Mauja. Thereafter the accused persons including the petitioner herein came at the said place of occurrence armed with rifle and other weapons and surrounded the said Pramod Pandey and tried to bring him to Suarmaka village whereupon the uncle of the informant raised an alarm to save him and then the petitioner is said to have fired Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57412 of 2017(5) dt.02-02-2018 2/3 from his rifle on the face of Pramod Pandey. The other accused are also said to have assaulted the prosecution side.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though there is direct allegation upon the petitioner in the FIR but during the course of investigation, especially after a direction was given by this Court to investigate the role of the petitioner herein, the A.C.P. in his supervision note has stated that the petitioner was not found at the place of occurrence. It is further submitted that most of the cases against the petitioner have been lodged after lodging of the present case and they pertain to illegal mining.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has also raised the plea of alibi which is said to have been substantiated during the course of investigation.
I have gone through the case diary and find that several materials are there to show that the petitioner herein is main kingpin of the gang which was instrumental in killing the deceased person and was the main conspirator, as such his role in the present occurrence has been prima facie found to be very much present. I further find that there are several cases pending against the petitioner and the petitioner is a habitual offender and is having a dubious criminal record.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57412 of 2017(5) dt.02-02-2018 3/3 Under such circumstances, It would not be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner herein since the same would result in travesity of justice.
Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is dismissed.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/-
U T