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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72682 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-351 Year-2023 Thana- NAGAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Sajjan Kumar Singh @ Sajjan Kumar Son of Sudhir Singh @ Sudhir Kumar Singh R/O- Chhoti Marari P.S- Hajipur Town Dist- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kr. No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 10-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dilip Kr. No. 1, learned APP for the State.

2.

Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Town (Nagar) P.S. Case No.351 of 2023, registered for the offence punishable u/s 147, 148, 149, 447, 341, 323, 307, 379, 385, 504, 506 of IPC and 27 of Arms Act.

3.

Allegedly, all the FIR named accused persons including the petitioner armed variously came at the door of informant and started abusing and on protest, petitioner fired from pistol upon the informant which hit to the uncle of the informant. One coaccused person took out Rs.5,000/- and snatched gold chain and fired indiscriminately to create terror.

4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72682 of 2024(2) dt.10-01-2025 2/2 He has been falsely implicated in this case due to grudge. No occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. It is further submitted that there is case and counter case between the parties and firing has been done by both the parties. It is fairly submitted that there is specific overt act attributed against the petitioner that he has fired upon the informant but his uncle sustained the gun shot injury. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that there is specific allegation of firing against the petitioner.

6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected.

7.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) priyanka/- U T