Navin Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39978 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2020 Thana- SAMHO District- Begusarai ====================================================== NAVIN SINGH Son of Late Mahendra Pratap Singh Resident of VillageSamho Sarlahi, P.S. Samho, District- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner.

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Dr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate.

For the State :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 22-07-2021 As prayed for, through Video Conferencing, let the learned counsel for the petitioner remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office vide its notes dated 24.12.2020, within four weeks of starting of the Court proceeding in physical mode in normal course.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State, through Video Conferencing. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Samho P.S. Case No.30 of 2020/G.R. No.1872 of 2020 registered under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code besides Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Begusarai. The accusation is that on 10.06.2020 at about 02.00

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39978 of 2020(2) dt.22-07-2021 2/3 A.M., Navin Singh (petitioner) and his brother Dilip Singh came at the door of the informant Rohit Bind and asked the informant and his son Butali Kumar to accompany them riding on horse. Thereafter, the informant and his son proceeded with them riding on horse and reached at the house of the petitioner and his brother. After sometime, the petitioner and his brother asked the informant and his son to move from there riding on horse but, at that time, Dilip Singh, the brother of the petitioner, fired through rifle which hit the right waist of the informant. Again firing was also made at the son of the informant but the informant could not see whether the same hit the son of the informant or not as the informant could not meet his son.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that while the petitioner and his brother Dilip Singh are named in the F.I.R., who accompanied the informant and his son on the horse but the allegation of firing is against Dilip Singh, the brother of the petitioner.

Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. However, the petitioner is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39978 of 2020(2) dt.22-07-2021 3/3 directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks from today and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T