Vikash Giri v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20964 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -181 Year- 2016 Thana -MEERGANJ District- GOPALGANJ ====================================================== Vikash Giri, Son of Hari Shankar Giri, resident of Village- Gosai Pipra, P.S.- Mirganj, District- Gopalganj.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anirudh Kumar Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dashrath Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mirganj P.S. Case No. 181 of 2016, registered under Sections 326, 307, 338 and 114/34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj. The accusation is that on 10.07.2016 informant along with his son Sonu Kumar Giri, cousin Bal Kumar Giri and nephew Raju Kumar Giri and Vishal Giri were returning after attending Barat ceremony then in the way petitioner along with two unknown persons armed with pistol started firing then he started fleeing. In the meantime, Vikash Giri shot fire at Sonu, son of the informant, who sustained injury on left hand and also on back and he fell down and other co-accused named in the F.I.R. also reached there for help of petitioner.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20964 of 2017 (2) dt.17-05-2017 2/2 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that due to land dispute petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and in custody since 16.01.2017. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner with submission that two fire arm injuries were found in the person of Sonu Kumar Giri, son of the informant. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner, above named, is rejected.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T