IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24276 of 2008 BHIKAHRI MUSHAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 6/8/2008 Heard Mr. Akhileshwar Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C. Jawahar, learned A.P.P. for the State. Petitioner has been made accused in a case under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation is that the petitioner along with other co- accused persons assaulted Bahadur Mushar by bricks, lathi etc. and he received injury and ultimately died on the next date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it cannot be a case under Section 302 I.P.C. as per the provisions under Exception 1 of Section 300 of Indian Penal Code. It has further been submitted that neither in the First Information Report nor during cross-examination, it has come that the occurrence was in planned manner with intention and motive to kill. All the persons were enjoying dinner. Under the impact of alcohol and certain provocation, the altercation took place resulting the injuries and subsequent death of the victim. Further submission is that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner of any assault rather allegations are omnibus in nature and it was one Mangru Mushar who was first engaged in the altercation. Learned counsel for the State submits that several - 2 - persons whose statements have been recorded under Section 161 Cr. P.C. have supported the case and two persons namely, Surji Devi and Baban Mushar are said to be the eye witness. In the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of offence and in view of the aforesaid submissions, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. However, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after completion of one year in custody, if so advised. S.Ali (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)