Satayadeo Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2470 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -203 Year- 2016 Thana -RAMGARH District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR) ====================================================== Satayadeo Rai, Son of Late Dharmdeo Rai, Resident of Village-ChhataBararhi, P.S.-Noan, District-Kaimur (Bhabua). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER ---------------- 03-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No.203 of 2016 registered under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code besides Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabua. The accusation is that when the informant alongwith his five friends were coming from the river at Chhata Barahi, then four persons were seen coming towards the bank of river and they called the informant. Out of them, the informant identified Satyadeo Rai (petitioner). Thereafter, the petitioner made demand of fish from the informant, then he replied that he has only 3-4 kilograms fish and he has to give the same to others. Thereafter, the petitioner went to the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2470 of 2017 (3) dt.03-03-2017 2/2 bush and a person handed over the gun to the petitioner, who shot fire at him causing injury on his thigh. The informant and his friends jumped to the river but, again, the petitioner shot fire causing injury on the waist of the informant. Anyhow, the informant crossed the river and informed his villagers, who took the informant to the hospital from where he was referred to the Sadar Hospital Bhabua. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the story, as narrated in the F.I.R., appears to be quite impossible and due to village politics, the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Further submission is that the petitioner having no criminal antecedent is in custody since 26.11.2016. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail with the submission that two firearm injuries were found on the person of the informant, which are said to be grievous in nature.

Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner for the present. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail stands rejected for the present. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T