Rajesh Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60786 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2025 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Rajesh Chaudhary S/o Rambihari Chaudhary R/o Village - Hariprasad Vishunpur, P.S - Jandaha, (Mahisaur O.P), District - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Himanshu Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-09-2025 Heard Mr. Himanshu Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jaudaha P.S. Case No. 79 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 24.02.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 109 read with section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. According to prosecution case, when the informant went to the orchard of the petitioner to take his money back then this petitioner fired upon him which hit in his right shoulder causing him firearm injury.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60786 of 2025(2) dt.08-09-2025 2/2 petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R that there is no intention to kill the informant. Although there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he has fired upon the informant due to which he has received injury.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from perusal of the F.I.R it appears that there is direct and specific allegation of firing attributed against the petitioner due to which the informant has sustained bullet injury and the doctor has opined the said injury as grievous in nature.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner and the injury is grievous in nature, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Jaudaha P.S. Case No. 79 of 2025 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate VII, Vaishali at Hajipur.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T