Rahul Singh @ Rahul Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28655 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2020 Thana- NAYAGAON District- Saran ====================================================== RAHUL SINGH @ RAHUL KUMAR SINGH Son of Late Shatrughan Singh Resident of Village- Dumri Buzurg, P.S.- Nayagaon, District- Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dhananjai Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Surendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 04-01-2021 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State.
This Court would expect that the petitioner's Counsel would honour his undertaking in the instant proceedings regarding supply of requisite court fee etc. within two weeks from the date he is called upon to do so by the office. Petitioner apprehends arrest in Nayagaon PS Case No. 40 of 2020 registered under Sections 147, 148, 323, 307 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
While the informant was at his home, he heard some noise. On coming out of his house, he saw that two groups were making noise on the eve of holi festival. The petitioner along with Vikram Singh and 10 - 15 other persons were on one side and Shiv Nath Singh, Prem Nath Singh and 10 -15 persons were on the other side. Vikram Singh is said to have fired from his licensee gun. The informant has suffered a gun shot injury on his knee and as per FIR he is not sure about identity of the author of the injury, Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28655 of 2020(3) dt.04-01-2021 2/2 allegation of firing is attributed to co-accused Vikash. Against this petitioner there is no allegation of resorting to firing. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. It is submitted that the petitioner has many criminal antecedents and earlier the petitioner has been accused of cases under Section 307 IPC. In the circumstances the petitioner should not be granted privilege of anticipatory bail.
Having considered the rival submissions the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U T