Guddu Singh @ Sambhu Singh @ Sambhu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76899 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2024 Thana- PIPRIYA District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Guddu Singh @ Sambhu Singh @ Sambhu Kumar Son Of Sri Rajendra Singh R/o Village- Karari Piparia Ps -Pipariya District -Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-11-2024 1.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Piparia PS case no. 51 of 2024, disclosing offences punishable under Sections 341, 307, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act.

3.

The prosecution story, as per the First Information Report, is that on 28.05.2024 at about 10.30 pm, the informant's son was walking along with his dog and proceeded towards his field. It is alleged that in the meantime, the petitioner reached there and fired on the son of the informant, due to which, he sustained injury in his temple.

4.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and the fact is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76899 of 2024(2) dt.19-11-2024 2/2 that petitioner was attacked by the informant of this case along with 2-3 persons, when he was at his land. Learned counsel further submits that during scuffle between informant and petitioner, informant has sustained injury from his revolver. He also submits that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent. 5.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the impugned order, in which it is stated that injury report attached with the case diary shows that the son of the informant has sustained firearm injury on his temple due to the fire made by the petitioner and in paragraphs no. 5, 6, 17, 20 and 21 of the case diary, witnesses have supported the case of prosecution, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.

The prayer for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, rejected.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) rinkee/- U T