Aman Kumar @ Aman Raj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33021 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-393 Year-2024 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger ====================================================== Aman Kumar @ Aman Raj S/o Manmohan Yadav @ Manmohan Kumar Singh R/o Vill./Muhalla- Mahuli, P.S. - Muffasil, District - Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjiv Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 13-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Muffasil P.S Case No. 393 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 324(4), 3(5) and 126(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 09.011.2024 at about 3:00 P.M., the informant was sitting outside the shop, in the meantime, the petitioner along with six named accused persons came near the informant and started abusing him and fired three rounds of bullets in the air and fled away after threatening of dire consequences.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33021 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 2/3 that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case as admittedly there is previous dispute between the parties. It is further submitted that no arms and ammunition has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner or from his house. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and stated that from perusal of the case diary, it would be evident that the witnesses examined by the police have categorically stated that it was the petitioner who, along with the other coaccused persons had come to the informant and he was having a pistol in his hand. It is further stated that from perusal of Paragraph No. 11 of the case diary, CCTV footage also supports the contention of the informant.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected and the petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below concerned within four weeks from the date of this order and pray for regular bail, the learned Court below may consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner in accordance with law and on its own merits without being

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33021 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 3/3 prejudiced by this order.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) Jyoti/- U T