Sanjay Singh @ Chuha vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4358 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.659 of 2020
    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-227 Year-2015 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda
======================================================

SANJAY SINGH @ CHUHA Son of siddheshwar Singh Resident of Village- Sargaon, P.S.- Noorsarai, Dist.- Nalanda.

... ... Appellant/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr.Sanjay Parasmani, Adv.

For the State           :        Mr.Bipin Kumar, APP
For the Informant       :        Mr. Niraj Kumar, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 27-08-2021

In view of sudden resurgence of COVID-19 infection there

is limited functioning of the High Court and therefore the matter has

been listed for consideration through virtual mode.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant, learned

counsel for the informant and the learned APP for the State.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant is expected to honour

his undertaking given in the instant case for depositing the requisite

court fee and to remove the defects as pointed out by office when

called upon to do so by the office.

4. Appellant has been convicted under Section 307 of the

Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act in connection with

Sessions Trial No. 622 of 2016, arising out of Noorsarai Police

Station (for brevity, PS) Case No. 227 of 2015, and sentenced to Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.659 of 2020 dt.27-08-2021

undergo R.I. for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the

offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, the

appellant has been further sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years

with fine of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 27 of Arms Act and in default

of payment of fine further additional imprisonment for six months,

prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail, during pendency

of the appeal.

5. Upon exhortation by co-convict, Nirala Singh, the

appellant has shot at the informant's son causing injury in his hand

and stomach.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

informant was not examined at the trial. Going through para 38 to 43

of the judgment, he discredits the entire factual findings at the trial.

Submission is that even the injured witness is not consistent with the

manner in which gunshot injury was caused. Medical evidence does

not corroborate the gunshot injury.

7. Learned APP and learned counsel for the informant

have appeared. They submitted that injured witness has clearly stated

about the gun shot injury being fired by the appellant which hit his

stomach, which is a vital part of the body, and for which he has

undergone treatment. Injury has also been opined to be grievous in

nature.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.659 of 2020 dt.27-08-2021

8. It is submitted that the appellant has till now spent two

years and five months in custody, though the sentence is ten years

rigorous imprisonment.

9. Considering the rival submissions and the deposition of

the injured witness corroborated by the medical evidence, the

Court, for the present, is not inclined to enlarge the appellant on

bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) rakhi/-

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE                N.A.
Uploading Date
Transmission Date