Gaurav Kumar @ Randwa v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8125 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-284 Year-2019 Thana- FATUA District- Patna ====================================================== Gaurav Kumar @ Randwa Son of Santosh Kumar @ Dablu Saw Resident of Village - Govindpur, P.S. - Fatuha, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-03-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned A.P.P. for the State at the outset submits that it appears that the petitioner is contesting a leisure litigation as from perusal of the FIR, it would manifest that the FIR is of the year 2019 and the petitioner at his leisure has moved before this Court seeking anticipatory bail in the year, 2025 when he has antecedent of three cases. It is further submitted that the informant alleges that the petitioner along with other accused persons assaulted him with arms with an intention to kill him and took him towards the railway line and the petitioner also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8125 of 2025(2) dt.06-03-2025 2/2 snatched Rs.26,000/- from his pocket. It is next submitted that though it has been pleaded that the case has been compromised but then it appears that the case was compromised under pressure when Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code is not a compoundable offence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to rebut the submissions of the learned A.P.P. that the petitioner after six years of the occurrence is moving this Court seeking anticipatory bail.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Fatuha P.S. Case No. 284 of 2019 pending in the Court of learned ACJM-V, Patna City/Successor Court.
6. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T