Vivek Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Munna Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

5 10-12-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

¶14

learned APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Chitragupta Nagar P.S. Case No. 14 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109(2), 3(5), 61(2) of BNS and 27 of Arms Act.

¶16

The present case is based on the fard beyan of the informant recorded on 16.09.2024 while he was under treatment at Medanta Hospital. He stated that four days earlier, Ujjawal, Gaurav, Anshuman and driver Vivek Mishra (the petitioner) had contacted him for a meeting. Later on, dispute arose regarding his gold and 8 lakhs, allegedly kept by Gaurav. Thereafter, an₹ unknown masked person entered into his office, locked the gate

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35612 of 2025(5) dt.10-12-2025 2/3

¶18

from outside with another accomplice, and fired at him, which hit his chest. The informant alleged that the attack was carried out at the instigation of Ujjawal, Gaurav, Anshuman and Vivek Mishra (the petitioner).

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. He is not involved in transaction of the money or gold as alleged in the FIR. Neither he is the person who is said to have fired at the informant. He has submitted further that during course of investigation, the scooty by which the miscreants came to the office of the informant, was traced and it was found that one Tuntun was driving that scooty. On disclosure of Tuntun, coaccused Krishnakant Choudhary @ Deepak Kumar was arrested and he gave vivid description of the entire occurrence in his confessional statement. From his confessional statement, it came to the light that the informant himself hatched the conspiracy of arraying co-accused persons in the present case and on his conspiracy, Krishnakant fired at him. The petitioner is driver of the informant and he has no concern with the occurrence. He is a person of clean antecedent. He has also submitted that when it was detected during course of investigation that the informant had hatched the conspiracy, he

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35612 of 2025(5) dt.10-12-2025 3/3

¶21

himself was made an accused in this case.

¶22

On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has

¶23

opposed the prayer for bail.

¶24

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, especially the clean antecedent, let the petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender within four weeks before the learned court below, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Patna in connection with Chitragupta Nagar P.S. Case No. 14 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶25

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

¶26

kundan/-

¶27

U T

Vivek Mishra v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Mishra v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sonu Bhagat Vs The State of Bihar

Savitri Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Jiyaul Haque @ Saheb Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Premavtar Bharti @ Firoz Bharti@ Firoz Bhari Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Anshu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar