Kamlesh Kumar Singh @ Kamlesh … vs The State Of Bihar on 3 August, 2011

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                    Cr.Misc. No.18801 of 2011
                   1. Kamlesh Kumar Singh @ Kamlesh Singh son of Sri Sheo Balak
                      Singh, resident of village-Paithanpur, police Station-Ara Mufassil,
                      District-Bhojpur at Ara.
                   2. Dhrupnath Singh son of late Dinanath Singh, resident of village-
                      Paiga, Post Office- Gundi, Police Station-Barhara, District-Bhojpur.
                                                                           .......Petitioners
                                               Versus
                       The State Of Bihar .                           .......Opposite party.
                                                 -----------

04. 03.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. No one

appears on behalf of the State.

These two petitioners had earlier filed an application for

anticipatory bail which was disposed on 24.05.2011 by the

following order:-

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for

the petitioners, seeks permission to withdraw this

application as the same has become infructuous.

Permission is accorded.

The application is dismissed as withdrawn.

In order to maintain the second application seeking

anticipatory bail, a supplementary affidavit has been filed by one

Bimal Kumar Singh uncle of petitioner no. 1. Paragraph 2 and 3 of

the said supplementary affidavit read as under:-

2. That it is humbly stated that the

petitioners were taken/arrested on

23.05.2011 by the officer In-

charge of Ara Muffasil Police

Station from the village of

petitioner no. 1 lying in Ara
2

Mufassil P.S. In this connection it

is stated that the petitioner no. 2

was also present there, who has

come to meet petitioner no. 1. Both

the petitioners were detained at

Ara(M) Police Station. Both the

petitioners were released in the

night of 24.05.2011. When the

Officer In-charge became

convinced that they are not

accused/wanted in any case

instituted at his police station.

3. That in the mean time Sri Nand

Bihari Singh, who was uncle of

petitioner no.1 informed the

counsel for the petitioners in the

morning that both the petitioners

has been arrested.

In that fact situation, this Court entertained the

application on merit.

Petitioners are accused in a case instituted under

Section 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The aforesaid case

was lodged by the Chowkidar when two unknown/unidentified dead

bodies were recovered near a bridge. In course of investigation, the

statement of wife of petitioner no. 1 was recorded under Section 164
3

Cr.P.C. In her such statement (Annexure-3) she has give out the

background leading to the occurrence. She has categorically alleged

that these two petitioners along with others dragged the deceased(s)

from the Samiyana and subsequently assaulted. Following day the

dead bodies were found.

Learned counsel appearing in support of the

application submits that aforesaid lady (wife of petitioner no. 1)

subsequently filed an application (Annxure-4), in the Court stating

therein that her statements to that effect was obtained by the police

under coercion/duress. In my view, the aforesaid document can be

considered as an attempt to tamper with the evidence.

Regard being had to the allegation and the materials

collected in support thereof including facts reflected from the

impugned order, this court is satisfied that petitioners do not deserve

anticipatory bail. Prayer is accordingly refused.

The court below shall forward a copy of this order to

the Superintendent of Police Bhojpur at Ara for information and

needful action, if any.

Devendra                                      (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)