Mannu Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46602 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-240 Year-2018 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Patna ====================================================== MANNU PASWAN Son of Kapil Paswan Resident of village- Hajipur, P.S. Fatuha, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajendra Nath Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 20-11-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Gopalpur P.S. Case No.240 of 2018 registered under Sections 25(1-b)a and 35 of the Arms Act.

The informant alleged that five accused persons including the petitioner came on two motorcycles. The informant after seeing them, started fleeing away raising alarm. All the accused persons began to chase the informant and they opened firing. On chase by villagers, two persons Rajnandan Paswan and Jhulan Kumar Paswan were apprehended and from their possession, arms and ammunition were recovered. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner surfaced in the case only because the motorcycle of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46602 of 2019(4) dt.20-11-2019 2/2 petitioner was recovered from the place of occurrence. One coaccused Rakesh Paswan has already been granted anticipatory bail by order dated 04.04.2019 passed in Cr.Misc.No.19840 of 2019. It is further submitted that the petitioner had gone to ease out after parking his motorcycle by the side of the road and there is no material to show that the petitioner participated in the alleged firing, but it appears that the informant made specific allegation that five persons came on two motorcycles and made indiscriminate firing on the informant but the informant managed to flee away. Many people assembled there and apprehended two accused persons from whose possession arms and ammunition were recovered. The motorcycle parked by the petitioner was also seized.

Later on, it was found that the petitioner was the owner of one of the motorcycles. The petitioner had also come with other accused persons on motorcycles and made indiscriminate firing on the informant. Having considered the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Harish/- U T