Pawan Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2862 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2019 Thana- TIKAPATTI District- Purnia ====================================================== PAWAN SINGH Son of Late Gyanchand Singh Resident of Village - Sapoha, P.S. - Tikapatti, District - Purnia.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Praveen Kumar,Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Surendra Kumar,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 03-02-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Surendra Kumar, learned APP for the State.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Tikapatti P.S. Case No. 21 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Earlier the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 26.09.2020 passed in Cri. Misc. No. 46080 of 2019 after finding that there is a direct allegation of firing against him on the husband of the informant. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only fact which could not be brought to the notice of this Court is that the petitioner is a constable in the Railway Protection Force. Submission is that being a member of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2862 of 2021(2) dt.03-02-2021 2/2 disciplined force, there is no likelihood that the petitioner would indulge in such activities.

In the opinion of this Court, the fact that the petitioner belongs to a member of uniform force and he is a constable in Railway Protection Force is not a change of circumstance for purpose of considering the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, whosoever is the petitioner and in whatever capacity he is employed would not be a reason to take a different view of the matter.

This application has no merit. It is dismissed accordingly.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.