Patna High Court - Orders
Navneet Kumar @ Sittu Singh @ Aditya ... vs The State Of Bihar on 19 June, 2014
Author: Aditya Kumar Trivedi
Bench: Aditya Kumar Trivedi
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43450 of 2013 (05) dt.19-06-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.43450 of 2013
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -304 Year- 2012 Thana -ROSERA District- SAMASTIPUR
======================================================
Navneet Kumar @ Sittu Singh @ Aditya Batsa
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
Criminal Miscellaneous No.6900 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -304 Year- 2012 Thana -ROSERA District- SAMASTIPUR
======================================================
Deva Punjiyar @ Dev Punjiar
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
Criminal Miscellaneous No.7367 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -304 Year- 2012 Thana -ROSERA District- SAMASTIPUR
======================================================
Sunil Paswan & Ors.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI
ORAL ORDER
05 19-06-2014In Cr. Misc. No.43450 of 2013 Navneet Kumar @ Sittu Singh @ Aditya Batsa happens to be the petitioner, in Cr. Misc. No.6900 of 2014 Deva Punjiyar @ Dev Panjiar happens to be the petitioner, while in Cr. Misc. No.7367 of 2014 Sunil Paswan, Raja Ram Paswan, Amarjeet Shettey happen to be the petitioners commonly originate from Rosera P. S. Case no.304 of 2012, accordingly been heard together and are being disposed Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43450 of 2013 (05) dt.19-06-2014 of by a common order.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
During course of chasing of the motorcycle borne miscreants, constable Gangesh Kumar was done to death by means of firearm as well as his pistol had also been taken away and on account thereof, on the self-statement of Officer-in-Charge Rosera P.S. instant case has been registered against unknown.
Contention on behalf of the petitioner Navneet Kumar @ Sittu Singh @ Aditya Batsa as well as Deva Punjiyar @ Dev Panjiar happens to be with regard to their innocence as well as their false implication at the instance of one Vijay Singh @ Pilai Singh, who has been convicted and sentenced on account of causing murder of uncle of petitioner Navneet Kumar @ Sittu Singh @ Aditya Batsa and presently is out of bail on account of his appeal pending before the High Court. As such, it has been submitted that their names have been purposely introduced by this Vijay Singh @ Pilai Singh in order to take revenge getting the police in his collusion and that happens to be reason behind having the names of the petitioners after gap of so many months. Furthermore, the aforesaid Vijay Singh along with his own henchmen came forward to depose against the petitioners after gap Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43450 of 2013 (05) dt.19-06-2014 of so many months. Therefore, the statement of the witnesses on that very score including that of Vijay Singh and Ganesh Kumar have become unreliable. It has also been submitted that one of the co-accused namely Roushan Panjiyar @ Praveen Panjiyar had already been enlarged on bail by Cr. Misc. No.25365 of 2013. As such, these petitioners are, in the background of animosity with the star witness Vijay Singh are entitled for bail.
The learned counsel representing petitioners Sunil Paswan, Raja Ram Paswan and Amarjeet Shetty has submitted that in casual manner they have been named without any specific allegation and on account thereof, their case stood on similar footing than that of Roushan Panjiyar @ Praveen Panjiyar, who had already been enlarged on bail vide Cr. Misc. No.25365 of 2013.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer and submitted that during course of investigation connectivity with the crime has properly been inter- linked along with specific part played by each of the accused and on account thereof, petitioners do not deserve bail.
From perusal of case diary, it is evident that one of the witness Upendra Mahto who happens to be a Home-guard Constable and was present at the spot while deceased was chasing Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43450 of 2013 (05) dt.19-06-2014 the miscreants over motorcycle had also ran following deceased and during course thereof, he had identified the motorcycle borne miscreants as Amit Jha as well as Raju Sharma as is evident from para-10 of the case diary. Then thereafter, the I.O. proceeded and in course thereof, took further statement of the informant under para-31, who, till then, had some sort of confidential information followed with hearsay witness Lal Singh under para-32. Then happens to be the statement of Manju Devi shopkeeper along with her daughter Priyanka Kumari under paras-49 and 50 respectively, who had stated appearance of Navneet Kumar @ Sittu Singh @ Aditya Batsa at the first instance, who after parking his motorcycle in front of her shop had gone other side of the bridge. After sometime, she heard sound of firing and then had seen Navneet Kumar @ Sittu Singh @ Aditya Batsa, Deva Punjiyar @ Dev Panjiyar and Amit Jha, out of whom, Amit Jha was in injured condition and blood was oozing out from his injury, who escaped therefrom boarding the motorcycle. At that moment Navneet was carrying pistol. Then recording statement of other witnesses under paras-54, 55, 57 and 60. Witness Ram Nath Mahto was examined under para-68 and he had given vivid picturisation of the occurrence including identification of accused along with part played by each of them. From his statement, it is evident that Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43450 of 2013 (05) dt.19-06-2014 while deceased entered into a scuffle with Amit Jha, Raju Sharma, Sunil Paswan, Deva Punjiyar @ Dev Panjiyar, Roushan Panjiyar, Amarjit, Raja Ram and Navneet Kumar, who were taking wine near temple have seen, gone in their rescue. Deva Punjiyar had caught hold constable while other snatched away his pistol. He fired and then the pistol was handed over to Deva Punjiyar, who on an order of Navneet Kumar @ Sittu Singh @ Aditya Batsa shot at causing instantaneous death. Navneet Kumar @ Sittu Singh @ Aditya Batsa took pistol and then escaped therefrom along with Deva Punjiyar, Amit Jha and Raju Sharma. He has further disclosed that so many persons have seen the occurrence. Then thereafter, there happens to be another witness on that very score under para-76 as well as para-95. Vijay Singh and Ganesh Kumar came at the fag end of investigation whose statements are recorded under paras-225 and 226 of the case diary followed with his statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. along with others (para-176). The aforesaid event has also been perceived while considering the case of Roushan Punjiyar by this Court at an earlier occasion under Criminal Miscellaneous No.25365 of 2013.
On account thereof, prayer for bail made on behalf of Deva Punjiyar @ Dev Panjiyar and Navneet Kumar @ Sittu Singh @ Aditya Batsa are rejected.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43450 of 2013 (05) dt.19-06-2014
So far as petitioners Sunil Paswan, Raja Ram Paswan and Amarjeet Shetty are concerned, their case stood on more or less similar footing than that of Roushan Panjiyar @ Praveen Panjiyar and on account thereof, they are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rosera, Samastipur in connection with Rosera P. S. Case No. 304 of 2012.
(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J) Vikash/-
U T