Abhijeet Kumar @ Abhijeet Paswan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42019 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-273 Year-2023 Thana- MAHESHKHUNT District- Khagaria ====================================================== Abhijeet Kumar @ Abhijeet Paswan S/o Surendra Paswan R/o VillageMaheshkhunt Puwari Tola, P.S.- Maheshkhunt, District- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rahul Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 386, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that while he was coming home after closing his shop on 18.12.2023 at 07:30 PM when he was shot from behind in his leg and when he turned he saw two accused with pistol, again
2/4 the accused fired causing injury on his elbow, but the informant managed to save himself, next alleges that about 20 days back, criminals had demanded Rs. 4 Lakhs as extortion which the informant did not give, as such the occurrence was committed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR is against unknown and the name of the petitioner was disclosed by the informant during the course of investigation as recorded in the impugned order. It is next submitted that the impugned order records- at Para 68 of the case diary, the victim stated that villagers, Abhijeet, Adarsh, Shubham and Shiv Shankar Paswan caused firearm injury for ransom of Rs. 4 Lakhs. It is next submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that in the FIR, the informant himself alleges that when he turned he saw two accused persons, but subsequently in his statement recorded at Para-68 he names four accused persons including the petitioner. It is also submitted that petitioner and the informant are known to each other as they belong to the same village.
It is further submitted that no doubt petitioner carries one antecedent, but then the petitioner came to be implicated in Maheshkhunt P.S. Case No. 253 of 2023 which was instituted by the present informant against unknown accused and subsequently got the petitioner implicated.
3/4 that if the informant could disclose the identity of the accused during the course of investigation, why the name of the petitioner was not divulged in the FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that what is not in dispute rather stands admitted is that informant received firearm injury.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Maheshkhunt P.S. Case No. 273 of 2023 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.
7. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his father, Surendra Paswan.
8. It is made clear that if the learned Trial Court comes to a conclusion that petitioner, after his release on
4/4 anticipatory bail, is trying to delay the trial in any manner in that event, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T