Mukesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89523 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2024 Thana- DIDARGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar Son of Bishwanath Prasad Resident of VillageMahmmadpur, P.S.- Didarganj, Distt.- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 27-01-2025 1.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Didarganj PS case no. 283 of 2024, disclosing offences punishable under Sections 109/3(5) of B.N.S. Act and Section 27 of Arms Act.

3.

The prosecution story, as per the First Information Report, is that on 11.08.2024, when the informant along with his grandson went to the shop, in the meanwhile, 4-5 persons came to the accused persons including the petitioner, standing there and demanded money from them. Thereafter, the petitioner along with co-accused persons started chasing the persons, who came to demand money. It is alleged that the petitioner fired from his pistol, which hit on the palm of the grandson of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89523 of 2024(2) dt.27-01-2025 2/2 informant.

4.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and he has been made the victim of circumstances. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner is accused in two other cases of the similar nature of offence.

5.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the F.I.R. and seizure list, which shows that petitioner has fired from his country made pistol, which hit the grandson of the informant and four empty cartridges and two live cartridges have been recovered from the place of occurrence, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.

The prayer for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, rejected.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) rinkee/- U T