Ravishankar Singh @ Ravi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.53893 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -313 Year- 2015 Thana -MOHANIA District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR) ======================================================

1. Ravishankar Singh @ Ravi Son of Santosh Singh, Resident of VillageJaitpur Khurd, P.S- Bhagwanpur, District- Kaimur (Bhabua). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.54904 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -313 Year- 2015 Thana -MOHANIA District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR) ======================================================

1. Ashutosh Pandey @ Asutosh Pandey Son of Santosh Pandey, Resident of Orgain, P.S. Bhangwanpur, District Kaimur (Bhabhua), Bihar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In Cr.Misc. No.53893 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Sunil For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar(App) (In Cr.Misc. No.54904 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M. Dayal (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 29-02-2016 Heard the Counsels for the petitioners and Mr. M. Dayal, APP for the State. Both the applications arise out of Mohania P.S. Case No. 313 of 2015 and, as such, they have been heard together with the consent of the parties. The petitioners seek privilege of anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 302/34 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. While the informant along with his mother was travelling on bus, it is alleged that at Akorhi More, two unknown persons

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53893 of 2015 (4) dt.29-02-2016 2/2 covering face and armed with country made pistol, entered into the bus and tried to pull out one passengers. Resistance was offered whereafter bulled was fired which hit the chest of the deceased and piercing the chest, the bullet also hit the thigh of the mother of the informant who got injured.

Contention of the petitioners is that they are not named in the F.I.R. At the initial stage of the investigation, their name did not transpire. The Police later arrested one Imran Khan who made an exculpatory statement naming these two petitioners. In the facts and circumstances, they deserve anticipatory bail. Counsel for the State opposed the prayer and contended that in a very dare devil manner, the occurrence was committed in order to loot the jewellary which the deceased was carrying after purchase. The investigation is still under way. The seriousness of allegation and the manner it was committed as also the fact that the investigation is still under way, I am not persuaded to extend them the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Prayer is accordingly refused.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Pankaj/- U T