Vijay Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27111 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-234 Year-2024 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Vijay Prasad S/o- Late Bhajan Bhagat Resident of Village- Fulwariya PSMinapur, Dist- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Chandra Shekhar Sharma, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-05-2025 Heard Mr. Chandra Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Minapur P.S. Case No. 234 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 109, 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., while the husband of the informant was connecting an electric wire, two unknown persons fired upon the husband of the informant causing injury on his hand and chest after receiving signal from

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27111 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 2/3 the petitioner. Petitioner has been alleged to be liner.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has committed no offence as alleged. Informant had taken money from the petitioner and the informant did not return the same to the petitioner and to put pressure upon him, the petitioner has been roped in a false case on the basis of false accusation. Petitioner has clean antecedent.

5. Mr. Raju Kumar, learned counsel has tendered his appearance on behalf of the informant and submits that informant had given some money to the petitioner and the petitioner with an intention to not return the said amount hatched conspiracy to kill the husband of the informant by hiring contract killer who fired upon the husband of the informant causing injury on the vital part of his body i.e. chest, however, the husband of the informant could be saved. Hence, the petitioner don't deserve to be released on bail.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, it appears that the the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and his role was of liner and upon his signal, two unknown co-accused fired upon the husband of the informant, petitioner was intentionally not returning the money and hatched conspiracy to kill the husband of the informant, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on pre-arrest bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27111 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 3/3

7. The bail application stands disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J) mantreshwar/- U T