Ganesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6716 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2023 Thana- CHAUSA District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.
GANESH SINGH S/O- LATE TANUKLAL SINGH R/O- VILLAGEAZGAIWA WARD NO.- 3, P.S.- CHAUSA (FULAUT O.P), DIST.- MADHEPURA.
2.
RAMBARAN SINGH S/O- LATE TANUKLAL SINGH R/O- VILLAGEAZGAIWA WARD NO.- 3, P.S.- CHAUSA (FULAUT O.P), DIST.- MADHEPURA.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vivekanand Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 17-02-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Chausa P.S. Case no.81 of 2023 registered under sections 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, as a result of firing resorted to by the two petitioners herein, the informant sustained gunshot injuries.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case because of land dispute. It is submitted that as per allegations in the FIR two shots each was fired by the two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6716 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2024 2/2 petitioners herein, however, the informant sustained only one gunshot injury. It has also not been specified as to the shot fired by which person hit the informant. The petitioners are in custody since 1.11.2023 and chargesheet has been submitted in the case.
5. Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the F.I.R. wherein specific allegation of firing is alleged against the two petitioners herein together with the contents of the injury report which finds mention in the order of the learned trial Court according to which the doctor found bullet injuries on the liver and stomach of the informant, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail and the application is rejected.
7. Liberty is granted to the petitioners to renew their prayer for bail after framing of charge.
(Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash U