Patna High CourtCR. MISC./14198/2019rejected

Sachita Nand Singh @ Sachida Nand Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2019-04-11Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14198 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2018 Thana- CHARPOKHARI District- Bhojpur ====================================================== SACHITA NAND SINGH @ SACHIDA NAND SINGH age-47 (M), Son of Late Haridwar Singh, R/o village- Itauar, P.S- Charpokhari , District- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 11-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with Sessions Trial No. 391 of 2018 arising out of Charpokhari P.S. Case No. 148 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-II, Ara. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to village politics. He is in custody since 10.07.2018. Nothing incriminating materials has been recovered from his possession.

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner with submission

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14198 of 2019(3) dt.11-04-2019 2/2 that on perusal of the first information report itself, it appears that there is specific allegation of firing upon the deceased by means of country made pistol against the petitioner, which hit on the right side of his chest. In course of investigation, the witnesses have also supported the version of the prosecution. The postmortem report reveals that the cause of death of the deceased is due to firearm injury.

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for bail. Accordingly, this application is rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) Shailendra/- U T