Anil Choudhari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87446 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-234 Year-2024 Thana- RIVILGANJ District- Saran ====================================================== Anil Choudhari S/o Chander Choudhari @ Haricharn Choudhari @ Chandan Choudhari R/o Village- Nabeeganj Chapra, Nabeeganj Bind Toli, P.S.- Rivilganj, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 21-01-2025
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Rivilganj Police Station Case No. 234 of 2024, disclosing offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1) and 352 of the BNS, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution story, on 06.08.2024, informant's husband reached the Shop of Rampravesh Mahto near 'Gambhar Tree' while the petitioner with an intention to kill her husband, fired with country made fire arm upon her husband who sustained firearm injury on his left arm near elbow. Petitioner first fired on Macintosh Rai for which informant's husband objected and upon objection, he fired on informant's
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87446 of 2024(2) dt.21-01-2025 2/2 husband.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case only for harassing the petitioner. Informant is not an eye witness. The occurrence took place in a public place but no one saw the occurrence and all the witnesses are hearsay witnesses. Injuries sustained by informant's husband are simple in nature. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.
5. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that informant's husband sustained gun shot injury and the allegation of firing is upon the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. This application is, accordingly, rejected. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) HarshPandey/- U T