Bhola Ansari @ Bhola Miya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32100 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2020 Thana- BHORE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== BHOLA ANSARI @ BHOLA MIYA Son of Kitabuddin Miya @ Kitabuddin Ansari Resident of Village - Kharesar (Khadensar), Police Station - Bhatpar Rani, District - Deoria (U.P.).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 20-12-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under section 307 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per the prosecution case, three persons on a motorcycle are stated to have over taken the informant. On the informant making an attempt to escape, it is stated that the accused persons started to fire causing several firearm injuries on the body of the informant.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the FIR was registered against unknown. The name of the petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of accused

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32100 of 2021(3) dt.20-12-2021 2/2 Pintu Kumar Singh. Inspite of the petitioner being in custody since 7.10.2020 he has not been put on TI Parade and charge sheet has been submitted in the case.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State who submits that in the confessional statement of Pintu Kumar Singh, the petitioner and one another are stated to have fired on the informant.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts of the case including the allegation of firing against the petitioner together with the petitioner having criminal antecedents of 11 cases as mentioned in paragraph no. 3 of the petition, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after six months.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Prakash/- U