Patna High Court - Orders
Pawan Kumar Rajak vs The State Of Bihar on 23 February, 2022
Author: Purnendu Singh
Bench: Purnendu Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28553 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2020 Thana- BIHARIGANJ District- Madhepura
======================================================
PAWAN KUMAR RAJAK Son of Late Narayan Rajak Resident of Village-
Rahuwa, Ward No. 4, P.S.- Bihariganj, District- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Rani Jaisawal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
7 23-02-2022Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
Let the defect (s), if any, be removed within two weeks.
The petitioner, who is in custody since 08.10.2020, seeks regular bail in connection with Bihariganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2020, for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The prosecution case, in brief, is that Sunita Devi, the informant of the case has alleged that her husband Praful Singh had gone out of his house with a co-villager Manjay Mehta. However her husband did not return back to his home. Upon enquiry made by her, she came to know that Manjay Mehta and her husband had gone out in a white coloured car. On Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28553 of 2021(7) dt.23-02-2022 2/6 26.09.2020, villagers informed that her husband and Manjay Mehta were killed by unknown criminals at a place under Bihariganj Police Station. The F.I.R. is against unknown. However in course of investigation, one co-accused Pawan Kumar Rajak has confessed the fact that the petitioner along with other co-accused have killed the husband of the informant Praful Singh and one Manjay Mehta, as it would appear from Paragraph No.36 of the case diary. SDPO vide supervision note has also found the case to be true against the petitioner and co- accused persons in Para-67 and 108 of the case diary. The doctor after conducting post mortem has ascertained the cause of death due to shock and head injury caused by fire arm and sharp cutting weapon. Chargesheet has been submitted against co-accused Pawan Kumar Rajak for offences under Sections 302, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act on 30.12.2020 and on 30.06.2021 charge sheet against the petitioner has also been submitted under Section 302 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that on mere suspicion, the petitioner has been made accused in this Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28553 of 2021(7) dt.23-02-2022 3/6 case. From the CDR report, it cannot be conclusively proved that the petitioner was involved in the said incidence. Even from perusal of the F.I.R., no motive can be concluded to rope the petitioner in the present case and mere allegation that the petitioner had talked on certain occasions with the co-accused is not sufficient to ascertain that he was involved in committing murder of the husband of the informant and one Manjay Mehta. There is no eye witness of the occurrence. He further submits that the husband of the informant Praful Singh and Manjay Mehta were veteran criminals and history-sheeter and several cases were pending against them and due to which there is every likelihood of some tussle between both of them which may have resulted into counter firing resulting into the death of both of them. Petitioner has clean antecedent and he is in custody since 08.10.2020.
Learned A.P.P. for the State however not denied the fact that the two deceased were dreaded criminal of the area, however he has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submits that complicity of the petitioner in the murder of the husband of the informant cannot be denied on the basis of the materials collected during the course of investigation and also from the CDR report, although there is no Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28553 of 2021(7) dt.23-02-2022 4/6 eye witness to the alleged murder of the deceased (husband of the informant and one Manjay Mehta) who were dreaded criminals of the locality and history-sheeter.
Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, rival submissions of the parties as well as perusal of the F.I.R. which is against unknown, the basic material to implicate the present petitioner is on the basis of confessional statement, the petitioner has been roped in the present case because the CDR confirms that they were in talking terms, law is well settled that suspicion howsoever strong cannot take the place of proof and for suspicion an under trial prisoner cannot be kept behind the bar even after completion of investigation.
By now it is well settled that gravity alone cannot be a decisive ground to deny bail, rather competing factors are required to be balanced by the Court while exercising its discretion. It has been repeatedly held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Sanjay Chandra Versus Central Bureau of Investigation (2012) 1 Supreme Court Cases 49, has held as Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28553 of 2021(7) dt.23-02-2022 5/6 under :-
"The object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at hi trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bai is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it can be required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon."
Apart from above, Court has to keep in mind nature of accusations, nature of evidence in support thereof, severity of the punishment, which conviction will entail, character of the accued, circumstnces which are peculiar to the accused involved in that crime.
The Hon'ble Apex Court has also held in several judicial pronouncements that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and found guilty.
In view of the above, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has made out prima facie case to be released on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sri Abhumanyu Kumar, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Udakishunganj, in connection with Bihariganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2020, subject to the following conditions :-
(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28553 of 2021(7) dt.23-02-2022 6/6 immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Court concerned.
(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court.
(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.
(4) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence, after his release on bail, the trial Court shall take steps to cancel his bail bonds.
(Purnendu Singh, J) sanjeev/-
U T