Niraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3998 of 2016 (3) dt.18-03-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.3998 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -86 Year- 2015 Thana -AGIAUN District- BHOJPUR ======================================================
1. Niraj Kumar Son of Late Mathura Nand Pandey, Resident of Village - Sikati P.S. - Agion (G), District - Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Ranjan Pd. Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 18-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Agion (G) P.S. Case No. 86 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 307, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Allegedly, the petitioner shot Gokulanand Pandey, the father of the informant whereas co-accused Dhiraj Kumar Pandey shot Arvind Chaubey, the husband of the informant, resulting, the husband of the informant died at once and the father of the informant died later one. The informant also received injury in the occurrence.
Submission is of false implication and that the father of the informant was aged about 68 years and he died after submission of chargesheet, there is no allegation that the petitioner
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3998 of 2016 (3) dt.18-03-2016 repeated the firing, due to land dispute the petitioner has been implicated and as such he deserves sympathetic consideration to which learned APP duly assisted by learned counsel for the informant opposes by submitting that the doctor has found injuries on the person of Gokula Nand Pandey and due to that injury later on he died.
In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.
(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T