Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6464/2017rejected

Amrendra Kumar @ Tuntun Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2017-04-26Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.6464 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -438 Year- 2015 Thana -MANER District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Amrendra Kumar @ Tuntun Rai Son of Sri Ram Babu Prasad Yadav Resident of Village/Mohalla- Tata Colony, P.S. Maner, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ram Sumiran Roy ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 26-04-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Maner P.S. case No. 438 of 2015 under Section 307 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act. Sri Yogesh Chandra Verma, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, submits that prayer of petitioner for anticipatory bail was earlier rejected by this court vide order dated 30.09.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27956 of 2016 but the petitioner has again renewed his prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that family members of the informant executed a sale deed in favour of the wife of doctor, who issued injury report, and, therefore, the injury report is ostensibly manufactured one but it appears that on the earlier occasion also the anticipatory bail

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6464 of 2017 (4) dt.26-04-2017 2/2 petition was rejected on the ground that it was the petitioner, besides others, who made indiscriminate firing causing injury to the informant. During the course of investigation, in paragraph 11 of the case diary, it has come that firing made by the petitioner hit the informant and, besides this, the petitioner has got criminal antecedent.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I do not find any new ground to reconsider the prayer of petitioner for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T