Kundan Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51312 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2021 Thana- TAJPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Kundan Thakur Son of Late Pintu Thakur @ Ramesh Thakur Resident of Village - Tiswara, P.S.- Tajpur O.P., Halai, Dist.- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-06-2022 Heard both parties.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Tajpur (Halai OP) P.S. Case No. 205 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Section 307 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act. As per the prosecution case, five accused person including petitioner riding on two motorcycle came and fired upon the son of informant causing firearm injury to him. After hearing the sound of firing informant's brother came out of house, then accused also fired upon him as a result of which he received three bullet injuries. Informant's son identified two accused out of five accused persons namely, Birendra Thakur and Kundan Thakur (petitioner).

It is submitted that petitioner has falsely been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51312 of 2021(2) dt.27-06-2022 2/2 implicated in this case. There is land dispute between the parties. Informant's son has criminal background. There is general and omnibus allegation. Petitioner has got clean antecedent.

Counsel for informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is specific and direct allegation against this petitioner of firing and son of the informant identified this petitioner as the person who fired at him. Considering the facts aforesaid and gravity of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T