Chiku Pandey @ Chinku Panday @ Vishal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2464 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-234 Year-2018 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya ====================================================== Chiku Pandey @ Chinku Panday @ Vishal S/O Manoj Dubey R/O VillageManpur Gandhi Nagar, P.S- Muffasil, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Prithivi Raj Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 08-05-2025 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Gaya Mufassil P.S. Case No. 234 of 2018 lodged on 13.07.2018, for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 326 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against six named accused persons including the present petitioner and there is nothing specific allegation against the petitioner. It has been alleged in the FIR that the accused Sonu Paswan fired a gunshot, which caused injury to the informant. Thereafter, the informant fell down and the accused persons fled away firing in the air.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2464 of 2025(3) dt.08-05-2025 2/3

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that the name of accused person who shot the informant is inserted in the FIR. Counsel submits that the name of the petitioner has been inserted in this case only due to the reason that his criminal antecedent is not clean, as there are twelve criminal cases pending against him. He submits that the allegations are general and omnibus and if any, it is only against Chunnu Paswan who is alleged to have given the order and Sonu Paswan, who is alleged to have fired. There is absolutely nothing against the petitioner. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is a labour by profession and has nothing to do with such type of incident. Counsel submits that accused Chunnu Paswan has been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.12.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 71866 of 2018. Counsel submits that petitioner is ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon him.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean as there are twelve cases pending against him and out of this, six cases have been lodged under Section

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2464 of 2025(3) dt.08-05-2025 3/3 307 of the Indian Penal Code and three cases have been lodged under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Counsel submits that series of cases are related to dacoity, theft and Arms Act against the petitioner.

6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Anushka/- U T