Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44731/2017dismissed

Binod Singh @ Binod Kr. Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2017-09-21Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44731 of 2017 (2) dt.21-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44731 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -11 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHUA District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Binod Singh @ Binod Kr. Singh S/o Manki Singh, R/o VillageChakkajinijam, P.O.+P.S.-Mahua, District-Vaishali .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rina Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Anil Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 2.

21-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner, in the present case, is seeking regular bail in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 11/2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 324, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur.

A perusal of the First Information Report (in short the "F.I.R.") would show that there is a direct allegation of firing against this petitioner which proved fatal. At the first instance, learned Senior counsel tried to impress upon this court that there are three F.I.Rs. with

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44731 of 2017 (2) dt.21-09-2017 respect to the same occurrence, this court has perused all the three F.I.Rs. being Mahua P.S. Case No. 10/2017 registered on 11.01.2017, Mahua P.S. Case No. 11/2017 registered on 12.01.2017 at 10:00 A.M. and Mahua P.S. Case No. 12/2017 registered on 12.01.2017 at 4:00 P.M., all the three cases are with respect to three different occurrences, and therefore, the submission of learned Senior counsel is not fit to be accepted by this Court. Since the petitioner is the direct assailant, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Hence, prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.) Rajeev/- U T