IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.32307 of 2011 Hareram Pandey Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 05/ 13.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant. This petition under sections 439 and 440 of the Cr.P.C has been filed on behalf of the petitioner- Hareram Pandey who is accused in a case initially, registered under section 307 and other minor sections of the IPC as well as 27 of the Arms Act but subsequently, section 302 of the IPC was also added. There is specific allegation against the petitioner that he made indiscriminate firings from rifle as a result of which having sustained fire arm injury one Sriram Sahu died in course of his treatment. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was in jail custody in connection with Ara Nawada P.S. Case no. 157/2011 and production warrant was issued by the learned trial court of the present case and on the basis of the production warrant petitioner has been detained in Ara jail but he had never been produced before the learned trial court of the present case but in spite of that the learned Addl. Sessions Judge dismissed the bail petition of the petitioner on the ground of maintainability. It is further contended by him that on the alleged date of the occurrence, petitioner was in Pulwarisharif jail on the charge of - 2 - travelling without ticket and he was released from the aforesaid jail on 8.2.2011 and the aforesaid fact was verified by the Investigating officer in course of investigation. It is further contended by him that, as a matter of fact, petitioner has been roped in so many cases by the informant of the present case on account of previous enmity and land dispute and in almost all the cases petitioner has already been released on bail. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer submitting that the petitioner is notorious criminal and altogether 16 cases have been shown in the credit of the petitioner which is evident from perusal of relevant paras of the case diary. It is further contended by him that that admittedly, petitioner has not been produced before the learned trial court and therefore, it is apparent that he has not been remanded in the present case as yet. It is further contended by him that there is specific allegation of firing and causing death of innocent person against the petitioner. So, the petitioner does not deserve privilege of bail. Having heard contentions of both the parties I have gone through the record. Without going and touching the point of remand, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to get privilege of bail in view of the allegation levelled against him as well as in the background of his criminal antecedent. Therefore, prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Brahampur P.S. Case no. 30/2011 pending in the court of Sri Rajesh Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Buxar is, hereby, - 3 - rejected. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)