In a bail petition under Section 307 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act, the High Court dismissed the prayer as the petitioner was the main assailant with specific accusation of firing causing injury.
Bail prayer dismissed; petitioner remains in custody.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.57075 of 2015
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -75 Year- 2015 Thana -GANGABRIDGE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR)
====================================================== Sri Kant Rai Son of Musafir Rai, Resident of village- Karanpura, P.S.Gangabridge, District- Vaishali
.... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Thakur For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER
3 19-01-2016 Heard Sri Ajay Thakur, learned counsel, who was assisted by Mr. Pravin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Madan Kumar, learned A.P.P.
The petitioner who is in custody in connection with Gangabridge P.S. Case No. 75 of 2015 registered for the offence punishable under Section 307 and other allied Sections of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act has prayed for grant of bail.
Sri Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the F.I.R. itself it has been alleged that about 15 accused persons arrived and in the said occurrence allegation is made for opening only one fire. He further submits that in the case F.I.R. was lodged at belated stage. Besides this, prior to lodging of the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57075 of 2015 (3) dt.19-01-2016
2/2
present case one F.I.R. was lodged from the petitioner’s side against the informant’s side. Accordingly, it has been argued that petitioner has falsely been implicated, whereas the learned A.P.P. opposing the prayer for bail submits that in the case there is specific accusation against the petitioner regarding firing which hit on the chest of the father of the informant.
Keeping in view the fact that petitioner is the main
assailant, there is no reason to grant bail to the petitioner.
The petition stands dismissed.
(Rakesh Kumar, J)
Praful/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner, who is the main assailant in an FIR alleging assault with firearm and injury to the informant's father?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri Kant Rai
The State of Bihar
Rakesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
