Raushan Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.51779 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -128 Year- 2017 Thana -BEGUSARAI TOWN District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== Raushan Kumar Singh, son of Gangotri Singh, Resident of Station Road, P.S. Nagar, District-Begusarai.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinod Gautam For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 02-11-2017 Heard leaned counsel for the petitioner and the leaned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Begusarai Nagar P.S. Case No. 128 of 2017, registered under Sections 25(1-Ba), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act and Section 414 of Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai.

The accusation is that while informant being the Officer-in-Charge of Town Police Station Begusarai was on patrolling duty then heard sound of firing inside N.H. 31. Thereafter, informant along with other Police personnel rushed at the said place and found that near the temple, 8 to 10 persons were standing in fear condition, on seeing the Police party four persons started fleeing, on chase one person was apprehended, who disclosed his name as Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Singh @ Fighter

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51779 of 2017 (2) dt.02-11-2017 2/2 on search one loaded country made pistol along with three empty cartridges and two live cartridges and one motorcycle was also lying there. On enquiry, he disclosed the name of his associates as Raushan Kumar Singh (Petitioner), Aman Kumar @ Ching Chong and Ankur Kumar disclosing that firing was made by them for realizing ransom. The apprehended person does not produce any paper regarding the motorcycle lying there. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would appear from the F.I.R. that the name of the petitioner has been disclosed by the co-accused Sonu Singh, who was apprehended on the spot. The petitioner was not apprehended on the spot.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trail Court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial Court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T