Ritan Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26460 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-511 Year-2019 Thana- DARBHANGA SADAR DistrictDarbhanga ====================================================== RITAN KUMAR SINGH Son of Basant Kumar Singh Resident of VillageHarnichak Anishabad, P,.S.- Beur, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Smt. Sharda Kumari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 13-10-2020 Heard Mr. Kumar Ravish, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Sharda Kumari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State through video conferencing. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Darbhanga Sadar P.S. Case No. 511 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 394, 411, 307, 326/34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, Sections 25(1-b), A, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.

The allegation against the petitioner as per the First Information Report is that when the informant was going to his shop, his Motorcycle was intercepted by four persons riding on two Motorcycles and one of the accused persons snatched the bag of the informant and fired upon him, due to which, he got

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26460 of 2020(2) dt.13-10-2020 2/2 firearm injury below his right waist. The petitioner along with one co-accused person was arrested by the Police on the spot and loaded pistol has been recovered from possession of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged. However, from perusal of the First Information Report it would be evident that the money, which was allegedly snatched, was not recovered from possession of the petitioner and only one loaded pistol has allegedly been recovered from him. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 03.12.2019. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after nine months if the trial does not show any progress. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) S.Ali/- U T