Rahul Pandit v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50792 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-244 Year-2024 Thana- MOHIUDDIN NAGAR DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== Rahul Pandit S/o Raju Pandit R/o Vill.- Mohiuddin Nagar, PS- Mohiuddin Nagar, District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ahmad Ali, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Mohiuddin Nagar P.S. Case No. 244 of 2024 dated 27.10.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/s 118(2), 109, 61(2) read with section 3(5) of the BNS, Section 27 of the Arms Act and 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have assaulted the informant and the petitioner fired from his pistol on the informant due to which he sustained injuries on his left hand and chest. On hulla, the father and the brother of the informant came and took him to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50792 of 2025(2) dt.08-08-2025 2/3 Government Hospital from where he was referred to Paras Hospital, Patna.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The name of the petitioner has sprung up in this case on mere suspicion. The occurrence took place on 25.10.2024 but the FIR was lodged on 27.10.2024 i.e. the delay of two days and there is no explanation for this delay. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The co-accused person has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 11.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30029 of 2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that the specific allegation of firing on the informant is against the petititioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the specific and heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner. It is not fit case for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected and the petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below concerned within

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50792 of 2025(2) dt.08-08-2025 3/3 six weeks from the date of this order and pray for regular bail, the learned Court below may consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner in accordance with law and on its own merits without being prejudiced by this order.

7. This application stands rejected.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T