Pappu Kumar Sharma @ Pappu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69422 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2022 Thana- SAHAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Pappu Kumar Sharma @ Pappu Kumar Son Of Sri Ram Sharma Resident Of Village- Anua, P.S.- Sahar, District- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pankaj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 30-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Sahar P.S. Case No. 152 of 2022 instituted for the offence under Sections 307, 504, 506, 448 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Allegation against the petitioner is that he entered the informant's house and started attempting to outrage the modesty of the informant's wife. When informant and his brother tried to save her then petitioner having armed with country made pistol, fired upon informant' brother which hit on his abdomen due to which he became unconscious.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this present case due to village politics. It is further submitted that there is difference in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69422 of 2022(3) dt.30-08-2023 2/2 the private hospital report and Government hospital report because in Govt. hospital, there is lacerated wound whereas in the Private hospital, doctor opined that gun shot injury found on the body of the injured. A statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 12.07.2022. Learned APP appearing for the state and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that the petitioner is named in FIR and there is direct allegation of opening fire on the abdomen of the injured due to which injured sustained gunshot injury which is mentioned in initial injury report of Shanti Memorial Hospital , Ara. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Shubham/- U T