Sunny Paswan @ Sunny Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63383 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2024 Thana- DIDARGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== Sunny Paswan @ Sunny Kumar, Son of Dharmendra Paswan, Resident of VIllage - Umednagar, P.S. - Deepnagar, Dist. - Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Nityanand Neeraj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satyendra Naryan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-11-2025 Heard Mr. Nityanand Neeraj, learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Didarganj P.S. Case No. 131 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. While the informant was standing near a shop of confectionery, in the meanwhile, 2-3 boys, who were talking among themselves, out of whom the petitioner fired a shot from his pistol, which hit on the right side of the neck of the informant, due to which he sustained bullet injury. After the incidence, all the three boys succeeded in fleeing away.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that there is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence, moreover, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63383 of 2025(3) dt.12-11-2025 2/3 entire incidence appears to be false and concocted and in fact only on suspicion, the name of the petitioner has been implicated in this case. The shop of confectionery, where the occurrence took place, various persons were present, but none of them supported the prosecution case. The petitioner is a man of tender age, having fair antecedent, and, as such, keeping the petitioner behind the bar would jeopardize his career.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that the informant was found fortunate that the bullet did not hit on the vital part of the body, however, there is a specific allegation of causing fire-arm injury.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the specific accusation of causing fire-arm injury over the neck of the informant, and duly corroborated with the injury report, this Court is not acceded to the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected.
7. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the jurisdictional court within four weeks from today, the court below shall consider the regular bail of the petitioner on the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63383 of 2025(3) dt.12-11-2025 3/3 basis of the materials available on record without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.
(Harish Kumar, J) uday/- U T