Shambhu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6443 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2019 Thana- MIRGANJ District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Shambhu Singh S/o Baliram Singh R/o village- Balahata, P.S.- Uchagaon, District- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sumit Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Mirganj P.S. Case No. 232 of 2019, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per the prosecution case, this petitioner along with co-accused Ashok Singh came on motorcycle and shot the brother of informant causing his death.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to land dispute between the parties. Not a single eye-witness has supported the prosecution case. No incriminating article has been recovered from possession of this petitioner. Petitioner is a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6443 of 2022(2) dt.17-05-2022 2/2 bona fide student purusing his B-Tech degree from Engineering College, Bhopal. Co-accused Dewanti Devi @ Sushila Devi and Pradeep Yadav have already been granted bail by different Benches of this court vide order dated 05.02.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6594 of 2020 and order dated 08.12.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 23791 of 2020. Petitioner is in custody since 27.10.2019.

Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is specific and direct allegation of causing firearm injury, as a result of which informant's brother died.

It appears that case of co-accused Dewanti Devi @ Sushila Devi and Pradeep Yadav is different and distinguished from the case of petitioner, as there is no specific and direct allegation against these petitioners.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner abovenamed on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T