Patna High CourtCR. MISC./16318/2024dismissed

Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-03-14Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16318 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2023 Thana- PUSA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Rahul Kumar S/o Lali Ray @ Satendra Ray R/o Village- Harpur Pusa, P.S.- Pusa, District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Binod Murari Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 14-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Pusa P.S. Case No. 132 of 2023 registered under Sections 307 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act lodged on 24.11.2023 by the informant, Ram Naresh Mahto.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that his son returned and informed that the accused persons firstly demanded money and upon protest, allegation is that this petitioner along with Ramanand Kumar and Parmanand Kumar caught him whereafter Chunnu Kumar and Siddarth Kumar opened fire which caused injury on his hand and abdomen. Accordingly, the FIR.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16318 of 2024(2) dt.14-03-2024 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the main allegation is/are against Siddarth Kumar and Chunnu Kumar of opening fire and against this petitioner along with Parmanad Kumar and Ramanand Kumar, the allegation is of having caught hold of the informant's son.

5. Learned APP for the State points out that this petitioner has criminal antecedent in which one relates to under Section 399 of the IPC and Arms Act.

6. Considering the allegation that has come against the petitioner coupled with the fact that he has criminal antecedent, it would be appropriate that he seek bail.

7. The Cr. Misc. No. 16319 of 2024 stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Jagdish/- U T