Bablu Tiwari @ Vikash Tiwari @ Vikash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45076 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2017 Thana- KHAGARIA District- Khagaria ====================================================== Bablu Tiwari @ Vikash Tiwari @ Vikash Kumar, son of Dinesh Tiwari, Resident of Village - Durgapur, P.S.- Muffasil, District - Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arjun Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Pushpa Sinha.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 21-02-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Pushpa Sinha-1, learned A.P.P. for the State. Petitioner, in the present case, is seeking regular bail in connection with Khagaria (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 24 of 2017, G.R. No. 103/2017 registered for the offences punishable under Section, 341, 324, 307, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. He is in custody since 20.02.2021 having no criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph '3' of the application.

As per the prosecution story, the informant has alleged that when he reached at his field, all the accused persons were already waiting for him with rifle, gun and attacked on him on the order of Dinesh Tiwary. The petitioner fired a bullet which hit in the left thigh of the informant as a result of which he fell down, thereafter he was taken to Sadar Hospital for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45076 of 2021(2) dt.21-02-2022 2/2 treatment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that previous enmity is going on between the parties.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

Considering that apart from there being specific allegation of firing against the petitioner, the fact is that he was arrested after almost five years of absconding, this court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this stage. Prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is, thus, refused.

Let the trial be expedited.

The learned trial court shall fix the case of shorter dates and all endeavours will be made to conclude the trial as early as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of communication of this order.

If the trial still remains unconcluded for no reason attributable to the petitioner, he may renew his prayer for bail. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.) Rajeev/- U T