Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32200/2019rejected

Deo @ Deo Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2020-07-15Mr. Justice Aditya Kumar Trivedi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32200 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-344 Year-2018 Thana- RUPASPUR District- Patna ====================================================== DEO @ DEO KUMAR, Son of Shri Ashok Kumar, age 22 years, Resident of Mohalla- Machhali Gali, P.S.- Shashtri Nagar, District- Patna, A/p Raja Bazar Salempur Dumri, P.S.- Hawai Adda, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 15-07-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.P.P.

There happens to be an allegation against the petitioner to have shot at the informant twice, which is corroborated by the injury report, alongwith others. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that for the same occurrence whereunder prosecution party being an aggressor committed crime causing injury to petitioner side and on account thereof, Rupaspur P. S.Case No. 343/2018 has been registered. After coming to know about the same, this case has purposely been lodged in order to make out a defence case. It has also been submitted that considering the aforesaid event other co-accused have already

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32200 of 2019(6) dt.15-07-2020 2/2 been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 18.12.2018 under Cr.Misc.No. 70972/2018. That being so, it happens to be a fit case whereunder the petitioner should be released on an anticipatory bail.

Learned A.P.P. opposed the prayer and submitted that there happens to be specific allegation against the petitioner to be an assailant of the informant by way of firearm and the injury is duly corroborated by the medical report. Others did not carry specific allegation. So, there happens to be clear case of distinction in between.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. That being so, the interim relief granted vide order dated 8.8.2019 is hereby recalled.

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J) Surendra/- U