Patna High CourtCR. MISC./78887/2018dismissed

Fannu Singh @ Fannu Sardar v. The State Of Bihar

2019-03-08Mr. Justice S. Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78887 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2018 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai * ====================================================== Fannu Singh @ Fannu Sardar, Son of Late Abhay Singh, Resident of VillageBabhangama, Police Station + District- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amrendra Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Ashlam Ansari (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 08-03-2019 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 02 of 2018, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Informant has alleged that on 01.10.2018 at 09:00 P.M. while he along with his father came at his Bathan near Durga Asthan in the meantime six persons including the petitioner riding on three motorcycles came there and they took his father and opened fire upon his father, who died on the spot. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has committed no offence. It is further stated that due to the old enmity for transaction of money

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78887 of 2018(5) dt.08-03-2019 2/2 between them the informant has dragged the name of the petitioner in this case. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 19.07.2018.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

However, after completing one year of the custody, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for grant of bail.

(S. Kumar, J) Rajiv/- U T