Guddu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86585 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-233 Year-2024 Thana- RAJAPAKAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Guddu Kumar S/O Sanjay Kumar Resident Of Village- Kashipur chabibi, Chaukipar, P.S- Baranti, Dist- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shivjee Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 18-12-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Rajapakar P.S. Case No. 233 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, on the alleged date of occurrence the informant along with his cousin was going towards Jandaha from Patna on his motorcycle to purchase goat, in the meantime two person sitting on Splendor motorcycle came and started assaulting the informant's brother and snatched away Rs.50,000/- cash and on protest one of the miscreants fired upon the body of the informant's brother, in which his brother sustained firearm injury, thereafter, they fled

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86585 of 2024(2) dt.18-12-2024 2/2 away.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., during the course of investigation police apprehended one Avinash Kumar @ Bhola and the apprehended person made confessional statement in which he allegedly accepted his involvement and disclosed the name of the petitioner as his associate. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioner is also involved in the present case.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the nature of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

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