Raushan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74544 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2020 Thana- HATHAURI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Raushan Kumar Son Of Satyanarayan Sahni R/O Vill - Deehjivar, P.S. - Hathauri, Distt. - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Suman Kumar Verma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-12-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

3. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Hathauri P.S Case No. 248 of 2020 dated 30.10.2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

4. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along with unknown miscreants is alleged to have entered the shop of the informant wearing mask and helmet and fired on the informant's son who succumbed to the injury on the way to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74544 of 2023(2) dt.06-12-2023 2/2 hospital for treatment.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to previous enmity and land dispute. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner is accused is one more criminal cases as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner by submitting that there is specific allegation of firing against the petitioner.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the specific and heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as the materials available on record against the petitioner, I am of the view that no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. The petition is rejected and the petitioner is directed to surrender to the Court below within six weeks from the date of this order and the Court below will consider the prayer of the bail of the petitioner without being prejudice by this order.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T