AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 27554 of 2024 · Patna High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail refused
for grant of bail is rejected
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 307, 323, 341, 386, 387, 504, 506
- Arms Act, 1959 s. 27
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, there being direct allegation against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer for grant of bail is rejected.
Judgment
Mr. Nafisuzzoha, Advocate Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate Mr. Utsav Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 2 18-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Choubey Jawahar, learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Gogari (Paura) P.S. Case No. 381 of 2023 instituted for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 307, 386, 387, 504, 506 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Prosecution case in short is that petitioner has fired upon the mother of the informant, due to which she sustained injury.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 22-10-2023. Petitioner Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27554 of 2024(2) dt.18-04-2024 bears six criminal antecedents, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.
It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no repetition of fire arm injury and in fact, petitioner has not fired upon the mother of the informant, rather it accidentally hit her.
Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is submitted that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of firing upon the mother of the informant, which hit her on the vital part.
Operative part
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, there being direct allegation against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer for grant of bail is rejected.
Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournments preferably within the period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
If the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period i.e., nine months, petitioner will be at liberty to renew Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27554 of 2024(2) dt.18-04-2024 his prayer for grant of bail before the court below. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj kishore/- U T
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: for grant of bail is rejected
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 307, 323, 341, 386, 387, 504, 506; Arms Act, 1959 — s. 27.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.