In Pankaj @Phakkad @Phakkad @ Pankaj Singh vs. The State of Bihar (2026), Supreme Court's 3-Judge Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and Vijay Bishnoi passed a 4-page long order dated May 7, 2026, wherein, it concluded:"Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, the period of incarceration already undergone by the petitioner, which is more than four years and nine months, and the fact that the pending appeal is likely to take substantial time for disposal, with the admitted case of the prosecution that the petitioner was not present at the time of occurrence, we are inclined to suspend the sentence of the petitioner and grant bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the appeal before the High Court. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner be released on bail, on such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court, in connection with FIR No.704 of 2017 date 15.09.2017 registered with Bihta Police Station, Sub Division Danapur, District Patna, Bihar."
The Court observed:"In the event the Trial Court or the State finds that the petitioner is delaying the conclusion of trial, it will be open for them to approach this Court for recall of this order. The Special Leave Petition and pending applications are disposed of accordingly."
Earlier, in Pankaj @Phakkad @Phakkad @ Pankaj Singh vs. The State of Bihar (2026), Patna High Court's Division Bench of Justices Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Praveen Kumar had passed a 9-page long order dated February 17, 2026, wherein, it concluded:"17. In presence of the entire evidences showing the
conspiracy in the commission of the murder of Nirbhay Singh, who was the President of the Local Traders Association and the deposition of the witnesses showing that it was because he was opposing demand of rangdari by the criminals, we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case for grant of suspension of sentence and release on bail. Prayer is rejected." The order was authored by Justice Prasad.
The appellant had approached the High Court for suspension of his sentence and release on bail during pendency of the appeal. Justice Prasad had relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Omprakash Sahni vs. Jai Shankar Chaudhary and Anr. reported in (2023) 6 SCC 123 reiterated in the case of Janardan Ray vs. The State of Bihar and Anr.passed in Cr. Appeal Nos. 1892-1893 of 2025 on 9th April, 2025. The High Court was of the considered opinion that "at this stage there are prima facie materials on record showing close connection of the appellant with the main assailant of the deceased. The electronic evidences on the record and the evidence of the IO (PW 6) are such that this Court cannot go into a threadbare discussion into the same in order to grant benefit of suspension of sentence to the appellant. 16. The case of the appellant is clearly distinguishable with that of Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Singh as pointed out by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State."
The appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 120B read with 302/34 and 326/34 of the Indian Penal Code vide judgment dated August 1, 2022 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge-XXIV, Patna, in Sessions Trial No. 81B of 2018 (CIS No. 1260081 of 2018), which arose out of Bihta P.S. Case of 2017, and sentenced, vide order dated August 8, 2022, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the offences under Sections 120B read with 302/34 and 326/34 and a fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he had to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months.
The prosecution story is based on the fardbeyan of Ajay Kumar (PW 4), who is the brother of the deceased. In his fard-beyan, the informant had stated that his family was engaged in business, he was five brothers and they have a cinema hall in Bihta known as ‘Uday Chitra Mandir’. On September 15, 2017, in the evening, he and his brother were getting the cleanliness of the hall and the nearby areas. At about 05:45 PM, when both of them were in front of the main gate of the cinema hall and his brother, Nirbhay Singh, was at a distance of ten steps ahead to him, all of a sudden firing started. The informant found that his brother Nirbhay Singh was surrounded by three persons, who were armed with pistols. The brother of the informant fell down on the road. The informant ran towards his brother, who had fallen down and was in pool of blood, the criminal involved in the occurrence fled away raising the weapons in their hands towards the kerosene oil depot of Raj Kumar Singh. The informant gave some description of the miscreants who were fleeing away. He disclosed that his brother had no enmity with anyone and that he can identify the criminals on seeing them. It appeared from the materials on record that in course of investigation, it was revealed that the main assailant Amit Singh, this appellant and some others were involved in the occurrence. So far as this appellant is concerned, it has come in the evidence that the main assailant Amit Singh was using the whatsapp number of the mobile phone of this appellant. The appellant has been convicted with the aid of Section 120B IPC.
No comments:
Post a Comment