Vinay Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65585 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-310 Year-2018 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali ====================================================== VINAY KUMAR SINGH Son of Ram Kripal Singh Resident of Village - Dih Buchauli, P.S.- Jandaha, Distt.- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 04-03-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 326 & 384 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act, Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act and Sections 13, 16, 19 & 20 of the unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967.

While the younger brother of the informant was taking meal, suddenly 9-10 persons came there and resorted firing on his chest and head due to which he died on the spot. When the informant came out of his house, the miscreants brandished pistol on him. When his uncle came to their rescue they also resorted firing upon him and also exploded bomb. Earlier to the occurrence, extortion money was demanded from

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65585 of 2019(4) dt.04-03-2020 2/2 his brother. During course of escaping away from the place of occurrence they chanted 'Maovadi Zindabad'.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that there is serious allegation against the petitioner hence he does not deserve bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and particularly considering the criminal antecedents, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

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