IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.35998 of 2009 HORIL CHOUDHARY, Son of Mihilal Choudhary, resident of Village-Mirzapur, P.S. Barahat, District- Banka. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 29/10/2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The allegation of causing fire arm injury and consequently the allegation under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code is sought to be resisted by counsel for the petitioner by taking a plea that such fire arm injury did not cause any injury on the vital portion of the body of the injured, inasmuch as, the said fire arm injury, even as per F.I.R, is found on the foot portion of the injured. Proceeding on this assumption counsel for the petitioner would submit that actually the prosecution side has taken advantage of the petitioner having previous track of criminal antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Three things go against the petitioner. First of all the petitioner was named accused for an offence dated 29.10.2007 and he has taken 22 months to surrender in this case, his date of surrender being 21.8.2009. There is no explanation as to why the petitioner did not surrender at an earlier point of time. Again the petitioner claims that he has criminal antecedent, but he has not disclosed in the bail application as to how many cases are pending against him. The offer, now being given by counsel for the petitioner that he will do so by filing a 2 supplementary affidavit, has to be noticed for its being rejected. The prayer of bail of the petitioner was rejected by the court below by also taking into account his criminal antecedent and yet the same was not dealt in muchless explained by the petitioner. Finally, this Court would also not find any merit in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that no offence under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code could be made out because the fire arm injury was found on the foot portion of the injured. There is no requirement of law that there must be an injury to constitute an offence under section 307 of the I.P.C. That being so, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Let the trial of the petitioner be expedited. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)