Sushil Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2019 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani ====================================================== SUSHIL SAH Son of Ramu Sah Resident of Village- Sarishav Pahi, P.S.- Pandaul, District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Subhash Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dashrath Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 20-01-2020 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 176 of 2019 for the offence registered under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The case of the prosecution in brief is that on the alleged date and time of occurrence while the informant was going to his home after taking tea from Hotel Jaika in the night at about 09.30 P.M. and when he had reached near the house one Rameshwar Jha, the accused persons including the petitioner herein had come on a motorcycle and stopped near him whereafter the petitioner is stated to have shot the informant in his abdomen.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46 of 2020(3) dt.20-01-2020 2/2 that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that though the petitioner is an accused in four other cases but he is on bail in the said cases. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner is languishing in custody since 02.08.2019.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court finds that the petitioner is the main assailant who is stated to have fired in the abdomen of the informant and a bare perusal of the impugned order dated 29.11.2019 would show that the injury report shows that the injury was caused by fire arm and the pellet is still lodged in the abdomen and, moreover, the petitioner is accused in four other cases, hence this Court is of the view that since the petitioner is alleged to have committed a grievous offence and moreover, the petitioner is having a bad antecedent, it would not be in the interest of the society to enlarge such a person on regular bail, hence the present petition stands dismissed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/- U T