Amrendra Kumar Roushan @ Amrendra Kumar @ Roushan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15870 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-225 Year-2023 Thana- KHANPURA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Amrendra Kumar Roushan @ Amrendra Kumar @ Roushan S/o Suresh Prasad Village Sirha Siropatti (in correctly mentioned in F.I.R. as Siropatti Sirha),PS Khanpur District Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Suneil Kumar Thakur , Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyendra Prasad , APP For O P 2 :

Bijay Bhushan Prasad , Advocate Rani Shashi Bharti , Advocate Swati Kumari , Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 341 , 323 , 307, 504, 506 and 34 of I. P . C and u/s 27 of Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner is alleged to have caused fire arm injury to the informant.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. As a matter of fact, the petitioner is a person with low vision and a 75% permanent disability in his right leg and knee, and he is not capable of sitting comfortably on a motorcycle . As such, there is no question of the petitioner's involvement in the offence as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15870 of 2024(2) dt.14-03-2024 2/2 alleged in the FIR.

5. Learned counsel for the state as well as O.P. 2 opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is a specific allegation against this petitioner that he caused firearm injury to the informant due to which the informant sustained injury on his right shoulder, and as per paragraphs 4, 5, 6, and 17 of the case diary, witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

6. Considering the nature of accusation that petitioner is named in the FIR and there is specific allegation against him that he caused fire arm injury to the informant, prayer for prearrest bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T