Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Patna High Court - Orders

Sonu Yadav @ Sonu Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 3 September, 2014

Author: Vikash Jain

Bench: Vikash Jain

       Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23557 of 2014 (2) dt.03-09-2014




                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                      Criminal Miscellaneous No.23557 of 2014
                             Arising Out of PS.Case No. -80 Year- 2014 Thana -RAJPUR District- BUXAR
                    ======================================================
                    1. Sonu Yadav @ Sonu Singh son of Bhim Yadav Resident of Village-
                    Nagpur, P.S.-Rajpur, District-Buxar.

                                                                                     .... ....   Petitioner/s
                                                            Versus
                    1. The State of Bihar

                                                            .... .... Opposite Party/s
               ======================================================
               Appearance :
               For the Petitioner/s     :  Mr. Rang Nath Choubey, Adv.
               For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Gopesh Kumar, A.P.P.
               ======================================================
               CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
                                    ORAL ORDER
2   03-09-2014

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 307, 308, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 Arms Act registered in connection with Rajpur P.S. Case No. 80 of 2014.

3. It is submitted that the accusation that four persons including the petitioner came armed with rifle and guns but failed to achieve their intended object of killing the informant, is highly improbable. Admittedly no injury was caused even though the petitioner allegedly fired on the informant. It is further submitted that the informant has since compromised the matter with the petitioner in terms of a petition dated 19.05.2014 filed before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar.

4. A perusal of the order of the learned Sessions Judge discloses that even though no firearm injury was Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23557 of 2014 (2) dt.03-09-2014 sustained as a result of alleged firing by the petitioner motorcycle of the miscreants which was left at the place of occurrence and latter seized.

5. Having regard to the specific nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence alleged against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed.

6. If the petitioner surrenders and seeks regular bail before the learned trial Court the same shall be considered on its own merit in accordance with law and without being prejudiced by any observation in the present order.

7. It transpires that the informant has levelled serious accusations in the F.I.R. against the petitioner in regard to non-bailable offences but thereafter he is said to have entered into a compromise with the petitioner having thus resiled from the accusations. In case the learned Court below finds substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the informant has in fact entered into a compromise, it shall take appropriate steps at the appropriate stage in terms of the provisions of Chapter-XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure which deals with the provisions as to offences affecting the administration of justice.

(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/-

  U             T