Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.18489 of 2012 ====================================================== Ramadhar Singh, Son of Late Ram Kewal Singh. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.18524 of 2012 ====================================================== Sanjay Singh, Son of Brij Kishore Singh. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.21873 of 2012 ====================================================== Laxmi Singh @ Arjun Singh, Son of Late Raghubans Singh. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate. (Cr. Misc. Nos. 18489 & 18524 of 2012) Mr. Sumant Singh, Advocate. (Cr. Misc No. 21873 of 2012) For the Informant : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Damodar Prasad Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA ORAL ORDER 3 29-06-2012 Since all the applications arising out of one case are taken up together and being disposed of by this composite order. Heard learned counsels for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, who is armed with carbon/xerox copy of the case diary. All the three petitioners, who are languishing in custody, seek Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18489 of 2012 (3) dt.29-06-2012 2 / 3 2 bail in a case registered under [STATUTE] , are named accused in this case, instituted on recovery of dead-body of husband of the informant, who died under unnatural circumstances and petitioners, namely, Sanjay Singh and Ramadhar Singh have allegedly accompanied the deceased, who was going with some papers relating to monetary transaction with third petitioner, namely, Laxmi Singh on his call. All the four enjoyed company of each other, taken wine in a hotel, and thereafter, in the very next morning the deceased’s body was found near a bridge under construction. Submission is of false implication. In fact, the deceased died of road accident while driving the bike in drunken state accompanied by petitioner, Laxmi Singh and one Nirbhay Singh, whose statement appears recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in paragraph – 16 of the case diary, stating about the manner in which the said accident took place, wherein, all the three companions, the deceased, the petitioner, namely, Laxmi Singh and non-petitioner/non-accused, namely, Nirbhay Singh sustained some injuries, but the injury sustained to deceased proved fatal. However, on regaining senses, Laxmi Singh and Nirbhay Singh, both left the place with solitary bike and petitioner, Laxmi Singh got treated somewhere by doctor, who opined that he sustained some fracture etc. and prior to accident, the other two companions i.e. the two petitioners on another bike had left the company of these three in the way and proceeded for their village. On the other hand while objecting the prayer, it is pointed out that in a planned manner the deceased was called and forced to take wine in huge quantity and ultimately he was killed and his body was thrown and left at the place of recovery. Petitioner, Laxmi Singh in his extra judicial Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18489 of 2012 (3) dt.29-06-2012 3 / 3 3 confession has accepted all these things. Further, it is also pointed out that it comes during investigation that the bike involved was owned by petitioner, Laxmi Singh, but under transfer to said witness, Nirbhay Singh, but paper transaction was to be complete. However, this much is undisputed that the two alleged owners of the bike in spite of being in drunken state were going on the same bike and permitted the deceased in drunken state to drive. If, this submission and statement of the petitioner is taken to be true, permitting to drive the vehicle in spite of being drunken state resulting into ultimate death of the driver and the two persons, namely, Laxmi Singh (petitioner) and Nirbhay Singh leaving the place, if at all, it was a case of accident with the bike without intimating anybody about the accident taking place, so that, the deceased could have been provided any medical assistance, if at all, it was required or he was alive after such happening speaks much against all the persons involved besides the autopsy report which also indicates two fatal injuries on the head of the deceased caused by hard and blunt substance. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case discussed in detail above, none of the petitioners appears entitled for the privilege sought. Accordingly, prayer for regular bail of the above named petitioners, in connection with Kutumba P.S. Case No. 07/2012, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, is hereby, refused. Simultaneously, the courts below are directed to proceed expeditiously with the trial and avoid undue delay and adjournments. Praveen-II/- (Akhilesh Chandra, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 302

Statute Text:
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Murder. Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.