Tej Narayan Singh @ Tej Bahadur Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52203 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2000 Thana- NATWAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

Tej Narayan Singh @ Tej Bahadur Singh S/o Durvasha Singh R/o VillDharahara, P.S.- Natwar, Distt- Rohtas 2.

Bhajan Singh S/o Durvasha Singh R/o Vill- Dharahara, P.S.- Natwar, DisttRohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shruti Sinha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 12-08-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable in connection with Natwar P.S. Case No.27 of 2000 under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act, which is pending before the court of S.D.J.M, Bikramganj, Sasaram.

3. As per the prosecution, the FIR has been lodged against 8 named accused persons including the petitioners with allegation that they have made indiscriminate firing due to which informant's brother died on spot.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. He submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52203 of 2025(2) dt.12-08-2025 2/2 case. He further submits that petitioners are residing outside the town and they are completely unaware about the pendency of the criminal case against them. He further submits that trial has been concluded against 3 appearing accused persons and in the said trial, all the accused persons have been acquitted.

5. Counsel also submits that antecedent of the petitioners is not clean. There is one criminal case pending against them. He further submits that trial has been conducted and no material has come against the petitioners.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and the trial has been concluded for 3 accused persons and any evidence came from the trial, shall not help in any manner. He further submits that at the time of consideration of bail, it has been specifically acknowledged by the sessions court that the present petitioners and other accused persons are absconding in this case since a long time.

7. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, therefore the bail application of the petitioners is hereby rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T