Guddu Kumar @ Manish Raj v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31495 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-958 Year-2022 Thana- AGAMKUAN District- Patna ====================================================== GUDDU KUMAR @ MANISH RAJ S/o- KRISHNA PRASAD MohallaSakri Gali Gur ki mandi, Ps- Alamganju, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Raj Krishna Jha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Akbar Ali ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 14-07-2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Agamkuan P.S. Case No. 958 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 447, 307, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, the petitioner fired upon the informant which hit him on his temple due to which he fell down. It is further alleged that when one person tried to stop him then the petitioner again fired which hit the palm of that person.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31495 of 2023(2) dt.14-07-2023 2/2 in the F.I.R. and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Allegation against the petitioner is false and concocted one and the informant has got simple injury on his body.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. He further submits that there is specific allegation of firing against the petitioner and in para 4 of the case diary, the informant in his restatement supported the prosecution case and in para 4 and 8 of the case diary independent witnesses have also supported the case of prosecution as mentioned in impugned order.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner and materials available on record, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present petitioner. Hence, the anticipatory bail of the present petitioner stands rejected. (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) Amitkumar/- amit U T