IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.16970 of 2008 RUDAL RAI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 9.5.2008 This is an application for grant of regular bail in a case of murder against four persons including the petitioner. The informant, Vandana Devi, lodged an F.I.R. alleging therein that at 2.00 P.M. while she along with her children was in her house and her husband , Gajo Rao, standing at the “Baithaka”, accused Sunil Rai on the order of Pancha Devi opened fire from his rifle causing injury on the chest of Gajo Rao. Thereafter accused Rudal Rai opened fire from his rife causing injury on the right arm. As a result Gajo Rao fell down. Thereafter the accused Anil Rai opened fire from his rifle which missed. Learned lawyer for the petitioner submits that wife of the petitioner had earlier filed a case, vide annexure 2, against the deceased under Section 448, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. He submits that there is enmity between both the parties. He submits that the deceased was a criminal and a number of cases were pending against him and in support he - 2 - has filed some documents, vide annexure 3 series. He further submits that the petitioner is said to have opened fire causing injury on the right arm, which is not a vital part of the body. He further submits that the case was lodged after one day. On these grounds, he prayed that the petitioner who is in custody from 21st February, 2008 be released on bail. As per the F.I.R., the allegation is that Sunil Rai opened fire with his rifle causing injury on the chest and the petitioner opened fire with his rifle causing injury on the right arm. Thus, the petitioner has not caused injury but he has actively participated in the commission of the offence. So considering the case of the petitioner, I am of the opinion that it is not a fit case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. (Anwar Ahmad, J.) chauhan