IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24176 of 2009 MANOJ KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 29.10.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Offences alleged against the petitioner are under sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named accused. However, he has been implicated in this case on mere suspicion of being a relative of the deceased (Sadhu). It is further submitted that the wife of the deceased initially gave her statement before the police which was registered as U.D., case in which she did not give name of the accused persons rather she expressed doubt that her husband died due to accident at the railway track. Later on after two or three days father of the deceased has lodged a first information report in which strong suspicion has been alleged against the petitioner as he was owing certain money of the deceased. It is submitted that there is no other material to implicate this petitioner with the crime. Learned A.P.P. on perusal of the case diary submits that during investigation some strong materials have been collected which implicate the petitioner in the alleged crime. It is submitted that during investigation the wife of the deceased has given her statement in which she has categorically stated the name of this petitioner with whom her husband had gone out of the house and later on this petitioner came back and on his cloth blood stains were seen . Besides this, the petitioner did not say as to what happened to the deceased when he has gone along with the petitioner. It is further submitted that the gate man of the railway track was also examined who did not support - 2 - the version that anybody had died due to the accident on the railway track. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the parties, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner in G.R.P.S. case No. 197 of 2008. The prayer for bail is rejected. (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J) M.Rahman