IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.1868 of 2009 SHEO SHANKAR SINGH S/o Sarva Nand Singh, Resident of Village- Piyaniya, P.S. Udwant Nagar, District- Bhojpur ---------------Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------------Opposite Party ----------- 2. 6.2.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the counsel appearing on behalf of the State and the informant with an undertaking to deposit deficit stamp. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case under Sections 302, 324, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner in the F.I.R. is that he is said to have fired on the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that mother of the petitioner had filed a title suit which was decreed and after which the petitioner and his family members came into possession of the suit land. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the informant does not appear to be an eye witness. In view of the fact that the injured witness has stated that co-accused Sharvanand Singh has fired on the deceased whereas this petitioner is said to have fired on the injured witness. It is further submitted that the deceased has enmity with several persons and it could be that he was killed by some of his enemies. Learned counsel submits that the genesis of the occurrence as made out in the First Information Report is false - 2 - and the manner of the occurrence is also unbelievable. All these submissions are good ground for consideration for the purpose of regular bail. However, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. On surrender of the petitioner the regular bail application should be considered without being prejudiced by any of my observation. P. Kumar (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)