Sonu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.23949 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -10 Year- 2017 Thana -PIPRA DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================

1. Sonu Singh Son of Sambhu Singh, Resident of Village- Kunwapur, P.S.- Pipra, District- East Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Akhileshwar Prasad Singh,Sr. Advocate Mr. Anuj Kumar For the Informant : Mr. Binay Kumar Sinha For the State : Mr. Ramchandra Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 09-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in Peepra P.S. Case No.10 of 2017 instituted for the offences under Sections 302 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. As per allegation the information has stated that on 16.1.2017 at about 3 P.M. he along with his brother Raj Kapoor Thakur riding over two motorcycles were returning to their house. The informant and one Vinod Thakur were on one motorcycle and on another motorcycle his brother Raj Kumar Thakur was sitting and it was being driven by Rajesh Singh, who were going in front of the motorcycle of the informant and as soon as their motorcycles arrived near Hardiya Bandh canal

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23949 of 2017 (3) dt.09-08-2017 about 20 meter western side the informant saw Sonu Singh (petitioner) along with two unknown persons standing there, who surrounded the motor cycle of his brother and fired upon. In the meantime Santosh Singh, Puskar Siungh and Karn Singh riding over a Platina motorcycle reached there. Karn Singh was driving the motor cycle and Santosh Singh and Pushkar Singh fired with their pistol on the back of the body of his brother who died.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced orders of this Court by which co-accused persons have been granted bail, such as Cr. Misc. Nos. 32444 of 2017 (Karan Singh), 12031 of 2017 (Pappu Pandey alias Rajeev Ranjan Pandey) and 120094 of 2017 (Shashi Bhushan Singh).

There is direct allegation against the petitioner and his case stands on different footing than co-accused persons who have been granted bail by this Court.

In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly the prayer for bail is rejected.

Vinay/- (Shivaji Pandey, J) U T