← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44446/2024bail rejected

Bhim Chauhan v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-21Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44446 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-630 Year-2023 Thana- HILSA District- Nalanda ====================================================== Bhim Chauhan SON OF BALMUKUND CHAUHAN R/o - Village - Puna, P.S- Hilsa, Distt Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Suresh Prasad Bhakta For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-08-2024 1.

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

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Hilsa PS Case No. 630 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 326, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that though petitioner is alleged to have fired causing fire-arm injury on cheek of the injured but then the injury is simple in nature.

4.

Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44446 of 2024(2) dt.21-08-2024 2/2 petitioner and submits that there is a specific allegation against this petitioner of causing fire-arm injury to the injured and the injured was treated at AIIMS, Patna and the bullet was taken out from his cheek.

5.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the informant, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T