Arun Bishwas @ Arun Kumar Bishwas @ Arun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54518 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2019 Thana- JALALGARH District- Purnia ====================================================== Arun Bishwas @ Arun Kumar Bishwas @ Arun Kumar, Aged about 37 years, Male, Son of Tirthanand Bishwash, Resident of Village-Serniya, P.S.- Dagaruwa, District-Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajit Ranjan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 30-08-2019 Heard both sides.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Jalalgarh P.S. Case No.43 of 2019, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

The informant alleged that at about 12.15 in the night, 15-20 criminals came to his house and made indiscriminate firing on the informant and his son. The informant and his son got firearm injury. The criminals were in search of his son, Ram Prasad Swarnkar. The informant further alleged that Arun Vishwas who had picked up quarrel with the son of the informant along with other accused persons had conspired to kill his son.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54518 of 2019(2) dt.30-08-2019 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has got enmity and that is why petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. The admitting enmity with the petitioner has been admitted by the informant himself in his fardbeyan. There is no allegation of firing against the petitioner but it appears that the petitioner was instrumental and on account of enmity, the petitioner conspired and it was the petitioner and his men who made indiscriminate firing causing firearm injury to the informant and his son.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U T