Sunny Kumar Chaudhary @ Sunny Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 84354 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-322 Year-2018 Thana- BIHPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Sunny Kumar Chaudhary @ Sunny Kumar, Male, aged about 32 years, S/o Krishna Nand Chaudhary, R/o village- Mauzabad, P.S.- Bihpur (Bhawanipur), Distt.- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Anil Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 14-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bihpur (Bhawanipur) P.S. Case No. 322 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 379, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. On perusal of case record, it transpires that the informant Mukesh Kuamr Choudhary filed written application before SHO Bhawanipur P.S. stating therein that on dated 13.08.2018 at 6 A.M. accused Sanni Kumar Choudhary called me on mobile phone at his home and started abusing and in course thereof the wife of Sanni Kuamr Choudhary ordered to shoot me. The wife of Sanni Choudhary was armed with pistol and Sunni was armed with pistol and a country made Katta and he fired two rounds each from country made Katta and pistol as a result I sustained injury at my right PAKHURA and left

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 84354 of 2019(2) dt.14-02-2020 2/2 PANJARA. Land dispute is going on in between me and Sanni Choudhary since two-three months and due to that reason Sunni Choudhary called me at his house and on the instigatioin of his wife fired on me with intention to kill me.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire allegation against the petitioner is false and concocted. The petitioner has been implicated in this case due to land dispute. He further submits that neither the petitioner was caught at spot nor any incriminating article has been recovered from his possession.

I have perused the record.

There is specific allegation against the petitioner. Hence, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby rejected.

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