Kamal Kishor Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21319 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2024 Thana- SALAKHUA District- Saharsa ====================================================== Kamal Kishor Singh S/O Late Ramdev Singh R/O Bahuarva, Ward No. 09, P.S- Salkhua, Distt.- Saharsa.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shivnandan Bharti For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2025

1. Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Salkhua P.S. Case No. 62 / 2024 dt: 22.02.2024 instituted for the offence under section 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 354, 504 & 506 of the I.P.C. and section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case on 21.10.2024 at around 1:00 P.M. the petitioner along with other accused persons, total eight in number, entered into the house of the informant, abused her, pulled her on the ground with hair, started searching other family members, opened fire and traumatized the family of the informant. Subsequently they resorted to firing near the 'basa' (shop) of the informant. In the night also the accused persons arrived and opened fire with rifle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21319 of 2025(2) dt.01-05-2025 2/2 has falsely been implicated in this case as a counter blast to the F.I.R. lodged by the side of the petitioner bearing Salkhua P.S. Case No. 60 / 2024. The occurrence has taken place between the parties due to the fact that cattle of the informant entered into the field of the petitioner and destroyed the standing crop. The used cartridge and bullets as mentioned in the seizure list was produced by the informant and it was not seized by the police at the place of occurrence. The side of the petitioner has sustained injury whereas no injury has been caused to the side of the informant.

5. Regard being had to the submission made by the parties, taking into consideration the nature of allegation and the fact that petitioner has five criminal antecedent and from the seizure list it appears that used cartridge and bullets have been seized from near the place of occurrence, accordingly, I am not inclined grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/- U T