Ravi Singh @ Ravi Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67317 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2019 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== RAVI SINGH @ RAVI KUMAR SINGH Son of Ramdeo Singh Resident of village - Panapur, P.S.- Bhagwanpur, District - Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 27-03-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 188 of 2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 504/34, 387 of Indian Penal Code and 27 of Arms Act. As per allegation, the petitioner came to the house of the informant along with 5-6 persons and started firing, which hit Anant Pandit, the brother of the informant, who became injured. Three empty cartridges were found from the house of the informant.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the name of the person, who fired at the injured, has not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67317 of 2022(3) dt.27-03-2023 2/2 been mentioned in the FIR. The petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case.

On the other hand, the learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the statement of injured Anant Pandit was recorded in paragraph no. 7 of the case diary in which he has stated that it was petitioner, who fired shot on him. Similar is the statement of witnesses in paragraph nos. 8 and 9 of the case diary.

Considering the fact that petitioner is assailant and also considering that he has strong criminal antecedent of 10 cases, I am not inclined to grant him bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.

If the trial is not concluded within a period of one and a half years, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Kundan/Nirmal U T