Sanjiv Kumar Mishra and Tuntun Mishra vs The State of Jharkhand

Hon''ble Mrs. Justice Jaya Roy

Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the State. The petitioners are accused in a case registered under Sections 341/ 323/ 379/ 307/ 34 I.P.C. and also u/s 27 of the Arms Act.

Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is dispute between the informant party and the present petitioners and regarding this dispute earlier the informant-party came to the petitioners and assaulted them. In respect of the said occurrence the petitioners have already filed a case against the informant party i.e. Sahibganj (Town) P.S. Case No. 172/2011 dated 10th October, 2011. The F.I.R of the same is annexed in this application as Annexure-2. It is further contended that the petitioners have fired twice to the informant party but no single fire hit the informant or any of the members of the informant-party when they fired from such a close range. It is further contended that there is allegation against the petitioners that they have assaulted the informant and the members of the informant party with fist and slap, therefore, it is quite impossible that the petitioners have any intention to hit the informant party with fire arms which shows false implication of the petitioners as they have filed a case earlier against the informant party.

Counsel for the State has submitted that there is specific allegation against both the petitioners that they have fired twice to the informant-party. He has further pointed out that admittedly there is enmity between the parties.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that there is specific allegation against the petitioners that they have fired twice to the informant party, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.