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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47876 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -244 Year- 2014 Thana -GAURICHAK District- PATNA ====================================================== Arun Kumar Singh @ Arun Singh .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anjani Kumar Sharan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Narsing Tanti-(A.P.P.) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 10-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

While the informant, Vikash Kumar along with his friends Tripurari, Murari, Rakesh, Sanjay was sitting over a bridge, at that very time Ram Singhasan Singh, Kantu Singh, Mundrika Singh, Chhote Singh came, abused, caught hold Rakesh Singh and began to drag towards their village, which was resisted by them. At that very time, Chhote Singh was armed with gun. During course thereof, they were joined by Vikas @ Bhim, Rajiv @ Lullu, Pravin, Navin, Jhagru Singh, Dipak, Raju @ Ran Vijay, Vikas, Karu Singh, Gulshan, Arun Singh (petitioner), Sonu, Monu, Vicky, Pawan Singh, Manoj Singh armed with gun, farsa and lathi and then, Dipak Singh, Vikash @ Bhim, Rajiv, Pravin and Jhagru Singh began to fire and on account thereof, they

sustained injury.

From perusal of case diary, it is apparent that no specific allegation has been attributed against the petitioner. At the present moment, learned counsel for the informant submitted that in Para-3 of the bail petition, petitioner has stated absence of his criminal antecedent, however, on protest made at their side on this very score, ultimately forced the petitioner to file supplementary affidavit as well as second supplementary affidavit concealed presence of criminal antecedent. Therefore, petitioner's conduct is not bona fide and in likewise manner, has intentionally and purposely violated the requirement as per High Court Rules. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of drafting of bail petition, there was no information at the side of the petitioner on account of petitioner being under custody whether there happens to be criminal antecedent or not. As soon as, it has been objected at the end of prosecution, the matter was verified and then thereafter, the same has been tendered before the Court.

Non-disclosure of criminal antecedent that too, there happens to be concealment at the level of lower Court also is serious incidence.

On that very score, I do not see it a fit case for grant

of bail at the present moment. Accordingly, prayer of petitioner for bail is rejected.

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J) Vikash/- U T