← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24568/2023bail rejected

Ranjeet Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2023-07-19Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24568 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2023 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger ====================================================== RANJEET SINGH SON OF FUDO SINGH Resident of village - Tikarampur, Budhan Marrar Tola, P.S. - Muffasil, Distt. - Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nawal Kishore Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-07-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases and is alleged to have shot the informant causing injury on thumb of his left leg.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that even the injury suffered by the injured is simple in nature and is on non-vital part of the body.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24568 of 2023(2) dt.19-07-2023 2/2 anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a criminal who is alleged to have shot the informant causing injury on the thumb of his leg which amply demonstrates that this petitioner is a trigger happy person, it is next submitted that the case is also instituted under the Arms Act.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P. for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. His prayer for anticipatory bail is thus rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T