Patna High CourtCR. MISC./7158/2018dismissed

Narendra Ram @ Lalendra Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2018-02-17Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7158 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1296 Year- 2017 Thana -SASARAM MUFFSIL District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Narendra Ram @ Lalendra Ram S/o Ram Bagedu Ram, R/o VillageShahpur, P.S.- Sasaram (M), District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Advoctate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 17-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sasaram (Muffasil) P.S. Case No.1296 of 2017 registered under Sections 307, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no allegation of firing against this petitioner even though allegation is that he had along with co-accused taken away this informant and then at one place near a canal they stopped the motorcycle and the unknown person who was accompanying the petitioner fired on the chest and head of the informant but the shot

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7158 of 2018 (2) dt.17-02-2018 2/2 fired on the head missed out and thereafter, on hulla, the villagers assembled.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submitted that it seems to be a case of blatant conspiracy where under this petitioner had taken away the informant on his motorcycle along with an unknown and caused the assault.

Considering the facts and circumstances, particularly that the petitioner's active participation is apparent from the statement made in the F.I.R. itself, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed. If an application for regular bail is filed, the court below shall consider the same in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) N.H./- U T