Rohit Kumar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71522 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2022 Thana- SIMRI District- Buxar ====================================================== ROHIT KUMAR PANDEY S/O Raju Pandey R/O Village- Nagarpura, P.SSimri, Distirct- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dr. Kamal Deo Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bharat Bhushan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 18-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner shot fire upon informant's son in his left panjari and on hue and cry made by the informant, police came and informant's son was sent for medical treatment by the help of police jeep at Primary Health Center, Simri from where he has been referred to PMCH, Patna for better treatment but in the way to hospital, informant's son was died.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71522 of 2022(3) dt.18-04-2023 2/2 not committed any offence. He has no criminal antecedent. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 23.03.2022. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submitted that there is direct allegation against the petitioner to shot fire on deceased. During investigation, several witnesses have supported the prosecution story and charge-sheet has been submitted u/s 302/34 IPC and Sec. 27 of the Arms Act. Postmortem report is also corroborated by the prosecution story. A metallic bullet has been recovered from the body of the deceased.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of offence as heinous, 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 and conclude the trial.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U