IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.21082 of 2009 BIKASH KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 24.8.2009 Heard Shri Ashwani Kumar Singh, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and Shri Dashrath Mehta, learned A.P.P. The petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit to bring on record the order dated 2.1.2009 passed in G.R.Case No. 536 of 2006 by which the petitioner Bikash Kumar was also put on trial by the Magistrate taking cognizance on the basis of the police report, though the police had not sent up the petitioner because it found that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence on the alleged date and time of the occurrence. The case is under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and as per the informant, who happens to be the father of the deceased, he and the deceased had gone to village Dariyapur for attending a marriage ceremony and while they were there, at about 11 P.M. a vehicle came up at the scene of occurrence, 2 some criminals alighted therefrom and dragged the deceased Navin Singh who cried out for help. The informant resisted without any result and, lastly, accused persons started taking Navin Singh towards N.H.80. The informant claimed identifying seven accused persons named in the F.I.R. and thereafter alleged that at the orders of Ramakant Singh this petitioner Bikash Kumar shot from his S.L.R. and killed Navin Singh. Accused Gautam Kumar and Nunu Babu also fired at the informant but he escaped unheart. The plea of the petitioner here and during the course of investigation was that he was attending his college in Patna on the day of occurrence and was present in Patna and, as such, was not available at the scene of occurrence. The police appears verifying the plea and finding it correct. This is too early to make any comment on the plea except that the occurrence is alleged to have taken place at about 11 O’clock in the night at the village which appears well connected by road and the location of the Police Station indicates as if it could be quite 3 approachable by railways also and an incident taking place at 11 P.M. may by itself overrule any plea of alibi of the accused. Learned Senior counsel was contending that except this petitioner a couple of other accused persons also had not been sent up for trial. Law is too clear to empower a Magistrate to summon any one who appears an accused who could have committed an offence and seeing the order of the Magistrate any court could hold that the Magistrate could be within powers vested in him to summon any of the accused who appeared to have his hand in the commission of the offence. The basic and elementary allegation against the petitioner is of firing shot and killing the deceased. That way, the petitioner appears to be the assailant of the deceased and considering that as also the weak nature of the plea, I am not inclined to direct the release of the petitioner on bail. The petition is dismissed. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)