Pappu Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5218 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-510 Year-2021 Thana- RAHUI District- Nalanda ====================================================== PAPPU DAS S/o- LATE BAIJNATH DAS Resident of Village- Shahpur, P.S.- Rahuai, District- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Majid Mahboob Khan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 504 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 06.10.2021 at about 06:30 PM, the petitioner whose wife is the new Vikash Mitra, abused the informant on the instigation of his wife Sunita Kumari (Vikash Mitra), it is next alleged that she was taking bath at village to well when the petitioner started firing from his roof and thereafter came to the house of the informant but she shut the door from inside, it is next alleged that petitioner knocked the door forcibly and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5218 of 2022(2) dt.18-08-2022 2/3 thereafter the present case came to be instituted. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that from bare perusal of allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the same is vague and cryptic, it is next submitted that wife of the petitioner and the informant were candidates for the post of Vikash Mitra since the wife of the petitioner got appointed as Vikash Mitra, hence the present false case came to be instituted implicating the husband of Sunita Kumari i.e., is petitioner in the present case. The learned counsel next submits that admittedly no cartridges were recovered from the place of occurrence.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Rahuai P.S. Case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5218 of 2022(2) dt.18-08-2022 3/3 No. 510 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Shivam/- U T