Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24609/2024dismissed

Anish Kumar @ Anish Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-20Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24609 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-781 Year-2023 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna ====================================================== Anish Kumar @ Anish Rai son of Lal Babu Rai Village- Tata Colony, Madhopur, P.s. Maner, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Patanjali Rishi For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajiv Nayan For the State :

Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh For the Informant :

Ms. Usha Kumari Singh Ms. Sunidhi Vimal Ms. Sonika Vimal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bihta P.S. Case No. 781 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, two persons are said to have shot at the deceased and killed him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Patnajali Rishi has vehemently argued this case and has submitted that only one gun shot injury has been found on the deceased and therefore the petitioner deserves bail. The post-mortem report

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24609 of 2024(3) dt.20-07-2024 2/2 suggests that the shot was fired from point blank range and therefore the prosecution case can be doubted.

5. The learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the application of the petitioner for grant of bail and have submitted that as the petitioner is the assailant of the deceased, the finer points are not available to the petitioner at the stage of bail and the same can be raised by the petitioner at the stage of trial

6. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

8. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same at the earliest. If the trial is delayed due to the fault of the prosecution side then the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U T