Injury caused during the hour of Open Firing by an individual doesn’t add up to Arrest: High Court Of Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20821 Arising Out of PS. Case No. 93 Year 2020 Thana SIKANDRA District Jamui Dhiraj Kumar @ Dhiraj Kumar Singhaged about 32 years son of Upendra Prasad Singh R o village and P.O. Darkha P.S. Sikandra District ... Petitioner s The State of Bihar ... Opposite Party s For the Petitioner s For the State CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Mr. Arun Kumar Advocate Mr. Jagdhar Prasad APP Date : 28 09 2021 Heard Mr. Arun Kumar learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jagdhar Prasad learned Additional Public Prosecutorfor the State 2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Sikandra PS Case No. 920 dated 09.05.2020 instituted under Sections 147 148 149 447 341 323 307 324 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act 1959. 3. The allegation against the petitioner and four others is of firing on the informant side and specifically against the petitioner that he opened fire by pistol though not hitting any person and against co accused Upendra Singh that firing made by him caused injury to the informant and Suresh Kumar. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20821 dt.28 09 2021 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the FIR except for bald allegation that the petitioner has also fired there is no allegation that due to his firing any person was hit. Further it was submitted that only Upendra Kumar has been attributed of firing on Suresh Kumar who has suffered bullet injury. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated just because he is the son of Upendra Kumar It was submitted that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedent. Learned counsel submitted that similarly situated co accused Kedar Yadav and Gorelal Yadav have been granted anticipatory bail by order dated 26.08.2021 in Cr. Misc. No 377220. 5. Learned APP submitted that as per the allegation the petitioner also had pistol in his hand and had opened fire However it was not controverted that no injury is alleged to have been caused to any person by such firing. 6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties there being only general and omnibus allegation that the petitioner fired from pistol without there being any injury caused and further the petitioner not having any other criminal antecedent the Court is inclined to allow the prayer of pre arrest Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20821 dt.28 09 2021 7. Accordingly in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks from today the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs 25 000 with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Jamui in Sikandra PS Case No. 93 of 2020 subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 and furtherthat one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner that the petitioner and the bailors shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to good behaviour of the petitioner and iii) that the petitioner shall cooperate with the Court and the police prosecution. Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or undertaking or failure to cooperate shall lead to cancellation of his bail bonds. 8. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions by the petitioner to the notice of the Court concerned which shall take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the 9. The petition stands disposed of in the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20821 dt.28 09 2021 (Ahsanuddin Amanullah J J. Alam 

Summary: The man claimed of making injury the witness side allowed pre-capture bail. It was claimed that the candidate alongside another open fire. The Hon’ble High Court of Patna before Justice Mr. Ahsanuddin Amanullah in the matter of Dhiraj Kumar v. The State of Bihar[Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2086 of 2021]. The current facts of the case were that the candidate was captured regarding a Case documented under Sections 147, 148, 149, 447, 341, 323, 307, 324 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. The candidate alongside four others was asserted of terminating on the source. The candidate open shoot by gun and co-charged were affirmed to make injury the source. The Learned Counsel called attention to that nobody was harmed during the terminating by the solicitor. Furthermore, it was presented that main Upendra Kumar has been ascribed to shooting on Suresh Kumar, who has experienced a slug injury. The applicant had no criminal predecessor and was presented that in a comparable instance of co-charged Kedar Yadav and Gorelal Yadav was allowed bail. The Hon’ble High Court of Patna fought that there has been a main omnibus claim that the request had discharged from the gun with practically no injury caused and that the solicitor had no other criminal forerunner. The court was leaned towards allowing a pre-capture bail. The appeal was arranged on the conditions that the applicant will help out the court, police, and arraignment. Any inability to the terms and fuse will prompt the wiping out of the bond. The pre-capture bail was allowed to the candidates in the wake of paying attention to the two players. The Hon’ble High Court of Patna held,” …in case of capture or give up under the watchful eye of the Court underneath inside about a month and a half from today, the solicitor be delivered on bail after outfitting bail obligations of Rs. 25,000/ – (25 thousand) with two guarantees of the like sum each as per the general inclination of the learned Judicial Magistrate, first Class, Jamui, in Sikandra PS Case No. 93 of 2020, dependent upon the conditions set down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and further (I) that one of the bailors will be a direct relation of the candidate, (ii) that the solicitor and the bailors will execute security and give undertaking concerning acceptable conduct of the applicant and (iii) that the applicant will help out the Court and the police/indictment. Any infringement of the agreements of the securities or undertaking or inability to collaborate will prompt abrogation of his bail securities.”