IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.26886 of 2008 CHUNCHUN SINGH @ TUNTUN SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR For the Petitioner:- Mr. Ganesh Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate For the State:- Mr. Upendra Kumar, A.P.P. For the Informant:- Mr. Anil Kumar Roy, Advocate ----------- 4 13.8.2008 Heard Sri Ganesh Prasad Singh, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, Sri Upendra Kumar, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Petitioner has been made accused under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. Allegation as per the informant who claims himself to be an eye witness is that the petitioner along with another accused fired at the deceased from behind causing his death. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the informant’s version does not seem to be correct as the informant was moving ahead of Badri Mian and it is not possible for a person moving ahead, to see the occurrence which has happened behind him. Further submission is that the deceased was a veteran criminal and was being prosecuted in many cases. In some cases petitioner’s uncle and father have been examined as a witness. It is stated that the petitioner is being falsely implicated in this case due to the aforesaid enmity. Further submission is that almost all the persons who have been examined under Section 161 Cr.P.C. are either family members or relations of the 2 informant and not a single independent witness has been examined by the Police. According to the learned counsel the petitioner is student of B.Sc and, thus, submits that sympathetic attitude should be taken. Learned counsel for the State submits that there is specific allegation of firing against the petitioner for killing the deceased. Ocular evidence is supported by the Post-mortem report also as there are entry wound in the back and exit wound in the front. Thus, the same supports the manner of occurrence which has been described in the F.I.R. Apart from this, many other persons who have been examined during the course of investigation have supported the occurrence. Learned counsel for the informant also supports the submissions put forward by the learned counsel for the State and says that there is direct allegation of firing upon the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid submissions and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner namely, Chunchun Singh @ Tuntun Singh in connection with Majorganj P.S. Case No. 97 of 2007. Prayer for bail is rejected. P.K. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)