Kunal Kumar Ishwar @ Kunal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32768 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2024 Thana- Singhaul District- Begusarai ====================================================== Kunal Kumar Ishwar @ Kunal Kumar S/o Sri Rambali Ishwar R/o vill - Maranchi, ward no. 5, P.s.- Bachhwara, Distt.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-08-2025 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 04.03.2025 in connection with Singhaul P.S. Case No. 32 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 10.04.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 120(B), 195(A), 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. According to prosecution case, on the order of coaccused, Bhola Singh this petitioner shot the informant due to which he received injury. It is further alleged that when the informant ran to save his life then all the accused persons including this petitioner fired indiscriminately upon the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is specific allegation against the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32768 of 2025(3) dt.01-08-2025 2/2 that he has fired upon the informant. The F.I.R has been instituted on the ground that the petitioner want to withdraw the case bearing Mufassil P.S. Case No. 603 of 2020 which was instituted by other persons in which the informant was one of the witness.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of material available on record and the case diary has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from perusal of the F.I.R it appears that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that the has fired upon the victim and the injury report also supports the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Singhaul P.S. Case No. 32 of 2024 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Begusarai.

8. Prayer is refused.

9. However, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T