Sanjit Kumar @ Sanjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64479 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-471 Year-2022 Thana- KHUSRUPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Sanjit Kumar @ Sanjeet Kumar son of Mithilesh Kumar Yadav @ Mithilesh Singh Village- Lodipur Mansurpur Ps- Khusrupur Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 20-09-2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits though the defect pointed out at serial no. 6(3) may be ignored as there is no discrepancy in naming the court where the matter is pending as mentioned in paragraph 1 and in the prayer portion where the satisfaction of the court is required, the same is learned A.C.J.M.-I, Patna City.

2. In the light of submission, the defect is ordered to be ignored

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

4. In the present case, the petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Khusrupur P.S. Case No. 471 of 2022, registered on 06.12.2022 for the offences

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64479 of 2024(3) dt.20-09-2024 2/3 under Sections 341, 323, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

5. As per prosecution case, the petitioner and other co-accused persons indiscriminately fired upon the informant causing injury to him. The occurrence took place in the background of the fact that petitioner and other co-accused persons were stated to be involved in murder of cousin of the informant and his wife and the informant is the witness in that case.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case and has no concern with alleged occurrence. There is land dispute between the parties. The petitioner was not even present at the place of occurrence at the relevant time as he was at Delhi. Though the cause of occurrence is stated to be due to involvement of the petitioner in Khusrupur P.S. Case No. 330 of 2022 but in the said case police submitted final form against the petitioner. The FIR has been registered after delay of 24 hours and considering the fact that the petitioner resides in close vicinity of the police station, deliberation and afterthought cannot be ruled out. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been made accused in four cases and he is on bail

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64479 of 2024(3) dt.20-09-2024 3/3 in all the cases.

7. Learned APP opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned APP submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he fired upon the informant who sustained firearm injury.

8. Considering the specific nature of allegation against the petitioner and also his criminal antecedent, I do not think it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail and hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Arun Kumar Jha, J) DKS/- U T