This oral order of the Patna High Court rejects the petitioner’s application for anticipatory bail arising from a murder case involving business rivalry and firearm injuries.
The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner stands rejected.
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.4584 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-249 Year-2019 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali
======================================================
Sanny Chaudhary @ Sanny Kumar S/O Surendra Chaudhary, R/O VillageKutubpur Saidpur, P.S.- Bidupur, Dist.- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Ranjan No.Ii For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER
4 26-09-2022
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
It is a case of commission of murder of the
husband of the informant. The informant alleged that
since her husband had business rivalry with the
petitioner and he had threatened earlier to kill the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4584 of 2022(4) dt.26-09-2022 2/3
husband of the informant, the petitioner might have killed her husband.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. There is no eye witness to the occurrence and
the petitioner has also no concern with the alleged occurrence. A statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
Learned A.P.P appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that there is circumstantial evidence against the petitioner to connect the petitioner with the crime. During investigation, the witnesses have also supported the prosecution case. The postmortem report also suggests the cause of death due to firearm injuries.
In the facts and circumstance of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4584 of 2022(4) dt.26-09-2022 3/3
The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner stands rejected.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
Shageer/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 302 IPC, 120(B) IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act.
Sanny Chaudhary @ Sanny Kumar
The State of Bihar
Sunil Kumar Panwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
