IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.17942 of 2008
RAJU SINGH RATHAUR @ SURENDRA NARAIN SINGH
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
-----------
3. 9.7.2008. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing
on behalf of the State.
The petitioner is an accused in a case under Sections 302 of
the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-B) 26,27of the Arms Act.
One Chhote Lal Sahani alongwith this petitioner and about
40 other prisoners were brought from the jail custody to the court
Hazat. It is alleged that this petitioner shot Chhote Lal Sahani after
reaching the court premises.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prisoners
are checked at three points before they board the bus, and as such, it is
not possible that the petitioner would have concealed a pistol on his
person. Secondly, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
pistol was seized and sent for examination to determine whether the
pistol was used in the said occurrence but Forensic Science
Laboratory has not submitted a report as yet which would demonstrate
whether the seized pistol was used in the occurrence. It is also
submitted that the father of the deceased Chhote Lal Sahani has filed a
complaint case against the police personnels alleging therein that since
Chhotel Lal Sahani was a criminal and the Police Administration was
against Chhotel Lal Sahani and they have killed him and pinned the
blame on the petitioner. I can not accept the aforesaid submission at
this stage.
-2-
However, considering the allegations, I am not inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner. The petitioner may renew his prayer for
bail in case forensic report is in his favour.
The bail petition of the petitioner is rejected with the
aforesaid observations.
A copy of the order may be sent to the Superintendent of
Police, East Champaran, Motihari..
U.K. (Sheema Ali Khan,J)