Nitish Singh @ Nitish Kumar @ Gopal@Gopal Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51151 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-772 Year-2022 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna ====================================================== Nitish Singh @ Nitish Kumar @ Gopal@Gopal Singh Son of Binod Singh Resident of village - Gabaspur, P.S.- Gaurichak, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Harendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 506, 120(B) of the IPC and 27 of the Arms Act in connection with Gaurichak P.S. Case No.772 of 2022.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is in custody since 05.02.2024 and the informant alleges that on 20.11.2022 he had gone to attend Tilak ceremony of the son of Dharmendra, where a dispute with regard to partition of land took place with Dinanath and Binod, thereafter, Dinanath and Binod asked Nitish (petitioner) to bring arms for killing the informant, on which Priyanka brought arms from her house and gave to her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51151 of 2024(2) dt.18-10-2024 2/2 husband i.e. Nitish and Nitish with support of his five named family members fired causing injury on his shoulder.
4. The learned counsel submits petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant on account of dispute relating to land. It is further submitted that from perusal of of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant alleges that Nitish along with his family members committed the occurrence.
5. The learned APP for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad opposes the bail application and submits that the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is beyond comprehension. It is further submitted that there is specific allegation against this petitioner of causing firearm injury to the informant.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, accordingly, the bail application is rejected. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Prakash Narayan U T