Upnesh Kumar Singh @ Upnesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37813 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2019 Thana- PATRAKARNAGAR District- Patna ====================================================== Upnesh Kumar Singh @ Upnesh Singh Son of Ram Singar Singh Resident of Village- Karnpura, P.S.- Gopalpur, District- Patna (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Y.C. Verma, Senior Advocate Mr. Ravi Kumar Panday, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 28-06-2022 Heard Mr. Y.C. Verma, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Rudal Singh, for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Patrakar Nagar P.S. Case No.105 of 2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner and co-accused Kallu Singh are said to have fired upon the son of the informant due to which the son of the informant died.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that there is no eye witness

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37813 of 2021(3) dt.28-06-2022 2/2 of the occurrence and only on suspicion, the petitioner has been made accused in the present case. It is submitted that the allegation of firing is against two persons and it is not specifically alleged that who fired upon the son of the informant.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner by submitting that there is allegation against the petitioner and one another co-accused to fire upon the deceased.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.) Sanjay/- U T