Juganu Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.514 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2020 Thana- RANIYATALAB District- Patna ====================================================== Juganu Singh S/o Late Ashok Singh R/o Village- Ekbalganj, Nisharpura, P.S.- Ranitalab, District- Patna.
... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant :
Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Binay Krishna Spl PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 05-04-2021 Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Spl. PP for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant is expected to honour his undertaking given in the instant case for depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defects as pointed out by office when called upon to do so.
3. The appellant has preferred the present appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989 ( for short 'the Act') against the refusal of prayer for regular bail vide order dated 13.10.2020 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-X-cumSpecial Judge SC/ST Act, Patna, in Special Case No. 162 of 2020 arising out of Ranitalab PS Case No. 70 of 2020, registered under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3(i)(r)(s)/3(2) (v) of the SC/ST Act.
4. The informant, uncle of the deceased, has stated that his nephew had gone for fishing along with Sita Ram and Rama
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.514 of 2021 dt.05-04-2021 2/2 Choudhary. The appellant and four unknown persons, who were present there, have fired upon the informant's nephew. Specific gun shot injury is attributed against the appellant.
5. It is submitted by the appellant's counsel that the prosecution case is bereft of any motive and, therefore, clearly unsustainable. The case is one of false implication and the appellant is in custody since 01.06.2020.
6. The learned Spl. PP has opposed the prayer for bail. He has assisted the Court with reference to the case diary to submit that the witnesses have consistently supported the prosecution case. The appellant is the alleged assailant.
7. Considering the rival submission, this Court, for the present, is not inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail. Prayer for bail stands rejected.
8. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J) shyambihari/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 06.04.2021 Transmission Date 06.04.2021