ORDER : 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the Informant. 2. The petitioner, who is an accused for offence under Sections 307, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, prays for anticipatory bail expressing apprehension of his arrest in connection with Rajganj P.S. Case No.27 of 2016, pending in the court of learned J.M. 1st Class, Dhanbad, has been filed on the basis of the Written report given by one Md. Zakir to the Superintendent of Police (Rural), Dhanbad, alleging therein, that his elder brother, Md. Nazim was going on a truck bearing Registration No.UP21 AN 3080 loaded with leather from Hapur to Kolkatta. At wee hours i.e. at 2.00 a.m., on 14.06.2016 gave a call from his mobile to his father that thieves are chasing him and on the point of Pistol, to stop the vehicle, but ignored the signal in high speed and crossed Rajganj in high speed. Thereafter his mobile was switched off. It is alleged that his father gave this information to the informant’s mobile. The informant disclosed that he is in Durgapur, West Bengal and his father asked him to check the vehicle of Nazim in the way. It is further alleged that the driver of vehicle, Nafish informed the younger brother of the informant that he along with Khalashi have been locked up in Tochanchi Police Station and the Police personnel shot his brother causing injury and was admitted in Tochanchi Hospital. Thereafter he proceeded to Topchanchi Hopital and Topchanchi Police Station to Hospital, but he could not locate his brother. Then he found his brother in injured condition at Patliputra Medical College and Hospital at Dhanbad and the Doctor advised him to shift at Durgapur or Delhi. On the basis of these allegations, the instant case has been instituted. It has further been alleged that Rs.40,000/- has been found missing from the brother’s pocket. 3. Learned Sr. Then he found his brother in injured condition at Patliputra Medical College and Hospital at Dhanbad and the Doctor advised him to shift at Durgapur or Delhi. On the basis of these allegations, the instant case has been instituted. It has further been alleged that Rs.40,000/- has been found missing from the brother’s pocket. 3. Learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that prior to lodging of this case, being Rajganj P.S. Case No.27 of 2016, one Topchanchi P.S. Case No.98 of 2016 (dated 15.06.2016 at 0:15 hours) was registered for the offence under Sections 279, 427, 307, 353, 34 IPC and Sections 25(1-b)(a)/26/27/35 of the Arms Act and Sections 6 and 7 of the ‘Jharkhand Bomine Act under Slaughter provisions of Jharkhand Bomine Act and subsequently Sections 30 and 31 of the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals Act. 4. It was further submitted that on 14.06.2016, at around 0.30 hours approximately SDPO, Baghmara received secret information that some persons have been smuggling illegal prohibited animals and leather. SDPO constituted a team of the Officer in Charge of Topchanchi Police Station, Police Inspector, Topchanchi Circle and Officer-in-Charge, Harihar Police Station immediately and made sanha entry and they proceeded to the place of occurrence. They reached to ‘Sane-Punjab Hotel’ put a barricade. 7 trucks were found overloaded with cow and bullock and one Truck bearing Registration No. UP 21AN 3080 was tried to jump and started fleeing away towards Barwadda. The SDPO gave signal to stop the vehicle, but the said truck dashed the Scorpio of the SDPO. It is alleged that information was given to Rajganj Police Station and the vehicle was intercepted. The truck which was fleeing away has stopped and the driver and two others persons got down and started fleeing away after firing. There was some scuffles with the Police Party and during scuffle, one person received fire arm injury when they tried to snatch the service revolver. Two persons were apprehended, from whom one 9 mm loaded pistol and two cartridges were recovered from Md. Nafis and Md. Zakir. Md. Nazir has received injury. 5. It was further submitted that one Umesh Kachchap, Officer in Charge, Tochanchi Police Station committed suicide on 17.06.2017 and UD Case No.05 of 2017 was registered. Two persons were apprehended, from whom one 9 mm loaded pistol and two cartridges were recovered from Md. Nafis and Md. Zakir. Md. Nazir has received injury. 5. It was further submitted that one Umesh Kachchap, Officer in Charge, Tochanchi Police Station committed suicide on 17.06.2017 and UD Case No.05 of 2017 was registered. The said case was investigated by the D.I.G., Sough Chotanagpur Range, Ranchi and found the case of suicide and further Rajganj P.S. Case No.27 of 2016 and Topchanchi P.S. Case No.98 of 2016 were also inquired by the CID under the ‘Jhrkhand Police Manual’ and both the cases were found to be true. 6. It was submitted that the petitioner at the relevant point of time was posted as Officer-in-charge, Harihar Police Station and joined the services on 22.06.2012 and the petitioner was discharging official duty and the injured was trying to flee away and during course of scuffle, he received injury. 7. It has been submitted that the fact remains that on the said date of occurrence, i.e. in the night of 13th/14th June, 2016, the petitioner was discharging the duty assigned to him and on the basis of the direction given by his superior officer, the petitioner proceeded in discharging of his duty. The manner in which the petitioner has been implicated in the present case, is absolutely deliberate and the fact that the petitioner while discharging his duty and acted bona-fide has not been taken into consideration. 8. It has been submitted that the foremost reason for implication of the petitioner in the present case is the medical report submitted by the Mission Hospital, Durgapur, whereas, the First Injury Report dated 14.06.2014 has not been taken into consideration. The injury report issued by the PMCH, Dhanbad dated 14.06.2016 with respect to the injured Md. Nazim is as follows :- (i) Circular punctured wound behind Rt Pinna 1 cm in diameter. (ii) Black swelling (Rt. Eye) (iii) L.W. forehead 2” X ½” Skin deep (iv) Pt. Semi conscious 9. It has been submitted that the injury report prepared by the Mission Hospital, Durgapur, is based upon the C.T. Scan of Brain wherein the nature of injury has been mentioned as follows : (i). Lacerated would/ bruise Temporal region (Rt. Side). (ii). Lacerated punctured wound –Left Parietal region (iii). Multiple Lacerations in the face. Semi conscious 9. It has been submitted that the injury report prepared by the Mission Hospital, Durgapur, is based upon the C.T. Scan of Brain wherein the nature of injury has been mentioned as follows : (i). Lacerated would/ bruise Temporal region (Rt. Side). (ii). Lacerated punctured wound –Left Parietal region (iii). Multiple Lacerations in the face. Subsequently, on the basis of the C.T. Scan Report, it has been mentioned that on what part of the body inflicted:- (i) Rt. Temporal Region. (ii) Left Parietal Region (iii) Multiple lacerations over face 10. It has been submitted that on the basis of the C.T. Scan report dated 04.05.2017, another medical injury report issued by the PMCH, Dhanbad, wherein, it has been mentioned that hemorrhage contusion in Rt. Temporal-parietal lobes. Foreign body in Rt. High parietal lobe. 11. It has further been submitted that from the aforesaid injury report, it will appear that the entry point of the pellet has not been pointed out by the Doctors neither in the Mission Hospital Report nor in the Final Report prepared by the PMCH, Dhanbad, whereas the injury report dated 14.06.2016 prepared by PMCH, Dhanbad, clearly speaks about the Circular punctured wound behind Rt. Pinna. 12. It has been submitted that when there is an entry wound as per the initial injury report on the right pinna and there is no exist injury found upon the injured, it signifies that the pellet remains inside the body of the injured person and all the injuries has to be found after the treatment meted upon him by the doctors and therefore, it cannot be said that the injury was due to firing upon from the back of the injured by the petitioner rather during the course of scuffle, the firing was made, which is the initial case of the petitioner as it has been mentioned in Topchanchi P.S. Case No.98 of 2016. 13. It has been submitted that during the course of investigation of Topchanchi P.S. Case No.98 of 2016, two empty cartridges have been recovered and seized and the expert report has been prepared by the FSL, Ranchi, in which, it has been stated that those cartridges were fired from the country made pistol. 13. It has been submitted that during the course of investigation of Topchanchi P.S. Case No.98 of 2016, two empty cartridges have been recovered and seized and the expert report has been prepared by the FSL, Ranchi, in which, it has been stated that those cartridges were fired from the country made pistol. If at all, the said FSL is being accepted then it will be evident that the attempt was being made for firing upon the police officials by the country made pistol and one country made pistol was also recovered from the accused in the said Topchanchi P.S. Case No.98 of 2016. 14. It has further been stated that the petitioner was following the accused person while he was fleeing away and when he was caught hold by the petitioner then there was some scuffle and during the course of which, the firing made which hit upon the accused person. The circumstances under which the said firing was made, it cannot be said to be intentional or it was within the knowledge of the petitioner that such firing could happen and as such, the petitioner cannot be held criminally liable for such action as the same was being done in exercise of his official duty. 15. A counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the Nazim (victim) who has received injury. Learned counsel appearing for the informant while opposing the prayer for bail, has relied on the following paragraphs :- (a) it has been submitted that the he is the victim of Rajganj P.S. Case No.27 of 2016 and he had been shot by the petitioner i.e. the then Officer in Charge of Hariharpur Police Station with intention to kill him, in course of checking vehicles on the G.T. Road and accordingly, a false case has been lodged against the petitioner and others in Topchanchi Police Station, Dhanbad, on the direction of the then S.S.P., Dhanbad, for save their skin. (b) The deponent was the driver of truck bearing registration No.UP-21AN 3080 and on the date of occurrence, i.e. on 14.06.2016 at about 2.00 a.m. when he was carrying Hyde from Hapud to Kolkatta and he informed his father on mobile that some anti-social elements were chasing his truck and he apprehended threat to his life. (b) The deponent was the driver of truck bearing registration No.UP-21AN 3080 and on the date of occurrence, i.e. on 14.06.2016 at about 2.00 a.m. when he was carrying Hyde from Hapud to Kolkatta and he informed his father on mobile that some anti-social elements were chasing his truck and he apprehended threat to his life. His father advised him to speed up and take shelter in nearby Police Station, subsequently Khalasi of the truck called to the elder brother (informant) of deponent that Md. Nazim (deponent) shot by some police personnel and hence, upon the said call the elder brother (informant) of the deponent came to Dhanbad and went to Topchanchi Police Station where the Police officers did not reval anything about the occurrence, but he cam to know from the unauthorized sources that his brother was being treated in a Hospital near Topchanchi Chowk on which he went from Hospital to Hospital and found the deponent in an injured and unconscious condition in PMCH, Dhanbad, and thereafter the brother of the deponent made a written complaint before the S.P. (Village), Dhanbad and lodged the FIR against the accused persons which was registered as Rajganj P.S. Case No.27 of 2016. (c) It has further been submitted that the other two staffs who were present with the deponent were detained at the Police Station and they have stated that on the fateful date and time of occurrence, some persons in plaint dress had tried to stop the truck on which the deponent sped away and thereafter, the said persons chased the truck by a black Scorpio, overtook the truck and blocked the truck due to which the Scorpio was hit by the truck while the deponent tried to stop it. Thereafter the petitioner got down from the Scorpio caught hold the deponent and shot him and these two staffs of the truck were mercilessly assaulted by the Police personnel. Thereafter the petitioner got down from the Scorpio caught hold the deponent and shot him and these two staffs of the truck were mercilessly assaulted by the Police personnel. (d) It has further been submitted that after finding the deponent in PMCH, Dhanbad, the elder brother (informant) of the deponent when consulted with the doctors, they told that the injuries are major and the position of the deponent is very critical and the doctors of PMCH, Dhanbad, have referred the deponent to New Delhi or Durgapur, for better treatment upon which the elder brother of the deponent shifted the deponent at Durgapur in the Mission Hospital, where the Hospital authority admitted him and started treatment for betterment of the deponent and till date the deponent is taking treatment at Durgapur in the Mission Hospital and also in a Super Specialty Hospital at Delhi along with AIMS, Delhi and huge amount have been paid by the deponent to the Hospital and finally he is live, but cannot do anything for his family members as because he is totally disabled by both eyes and ear and the body of the deponent is not able to do any work as because he has became physically damaged for lifetime and for the medical treatment, his family members had sold out the trucks which were the source of bread earning and this situation had come, for which the petitioner is only responsible. (e) It has further been submitted that after the said occurrence, this petitioner and other senior Police officers of the District pressurized the Umesh Kachhap, (Late), the then officer-in-charge of Topchanchi to lodge a false case against the deponent and his two staffs (Khalasis). Due to pressure of the then senior police officer, specially by the then S.S.P., Dhanbad, the then S.D.P.O. and by this petitioner, the said Topchanchi P.S. Case No.98 of 2016 had been lodged by the then officer-in-charge (late Umesh Kachhap), Topchanchi and registered the false F.I.R. against the deponent and two office staffs. Due to pressure of the then senior police officer, specially by the then S.S.P., Dhanbad, the then S.D.P.O. and by this petitioner, the said Topchanchi P.S. Case No.98 of 2016 had been lodged by the then officer-in-charge (late Umesh Kachhap), Topchanchi and registered the false F.I.R. against the deponent and two office staffs. (f) It has been submitted that at later stage came to know from different sources and media reports that Umesh Kachhap, the then Officer-in-Charge, Topchanchi Police Station, Dhanbad, was pressurized by the then S.S.P., Dhanbad, Shri Surendra Kumar Jha and other Police officers to make the case true against the deponent and his two staffs, Umesh Kacchhap was pressurized, threatened by S.S.P. to make the case true, Umesh Kacchhap was under tremendous pressure by S.S.P., Dhanbad, and after that due to the said pressure and frustration, he committed suicide in the premises of the Topchanci, Police Station for which a U.D. Case has been registered to the same Police Station, i.e. Topchanchi P.S., U.D. Case No.05 of 2016. (g) It has been submitted that after getting the complicity in all the above said cases, the Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi had constituted two members enquiry committee for enquired the matter headed by Sri S.S. Meena, Secretary, Department of Cabinet Secretariat, and Vigilance, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi and Sri Ajay Kumar Singhy, Additional Director General of Police, C.I.D. The committee after collecting all the possible evidences enquired the whole matter and submits the report on 01.07.2017 and the report they found that, the case lodged by the petitioner i.e. Topchanchi P.S. Case No.98 of 2016 is false and also found that the said case has been filed only to save the skin of Police officers and on the direction of the Senior police officer of the district, as because in the written report of the petitioner he states that he was doing checking on the order of S.D.P.O., Baghmara, for stop the vehicles which were in speed and also written that the driver of the said truck was stopped the truck inside of the road due to long line of the trucks, which shows that there was several persons were available on the place of occurrence. The committee also found genuine of Rajganj P.S. Case No.27/2016 and also reported that Md. Imtiyaz Hussain, Officer-in-Charge, Rajganj, was not ready to lodge the FIR in his Police Station and Md. The committee also found genuine of Rajganj P.S. Case No.27/2016 and also reported that Md. Imtiyaz Hussain, Officer-in-Charge, Rajganj, was not ready to lodge the FIR in his Police Station and Md. Manjarul Hoda, the then S.D.P.O., Baghmara, in his report said that it was a continuing offence and the Topchanchi P.S. Case was lodged on the directions of the senior police officers of the district, hence, it became very clear that the occurrence took place in the area of Rajganj Police Station and on the pressure of the senior police officers, the case was lodged in the Topchanchi Police Station due to which the officer-in-charge, Topchanchi became frustrated and the said story was discussed by him with his family members. The committee after collecting the evidences reported that all the matter was known by the S.S.P., Dhanbad, but he has created pressure upon the Late Umesh Kacchhap, Officer-in-Charge, Topchanchi, for registration of the said false case against the deponent and others and when the pressure was created upon him and removed from the I.O. of the said case, Late Umesh Kacchhap became frustrated and because of pressure from seniors just after that he had committed suicide in the premises of the Topchanchi Police Station and hence, committee strongly recommended to get investigation of Topchanchi P.S. Case No.19 of 2016, Rajganj P.S. Case No.27/ 2016, Topchanchi P.S. (U.D.) Case No.5 of 2016 and petition of Shri Bipin Kacchhap (nephew of Late Umesh Kacchhap) to be done by any independent agency. (h) It has further been submitted that the Rajganj P.S. Case No.27 of 2016 and Topchanchi P.S. Case No.98 of 2016 was supervised by Sri R. K. Dhan, Deputy Inspector General of Police, South Chotanagpur Range, Ranchi and according to his supervision report, the Rajganj P.S. Case No.27 of 2016 found to be true against this petitioner and other accused persons and Topchanchi P.S. Case No.98 of 2016 was found false under all the sections except Sections 279/427 of the I.P.C. as per the contents of the local newspapers report. The D.I.G. Range, Shri R. K. Dhan had submitted his supervision note on all the three related cases on 17.11.2016. 16. Learned counsel appearing for the informant relying on the aforesaid submissions submits that the petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 17. The D.I.G. Range, Shri R. K. Dhan had submitted his supervision note on all the three related cases on 17.11.2016. 16. Learned counsel appearing for the informant relying on the aforesaid submissions submits that the petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 17. In this case, learned counsel appearing for the State also appeared and opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the case diary has also been received. It appears that at Para 70 of the case diary, statement of one Manjrul Hoda who was member of the Patrolling force and has given vivid description of the occurrence which has taken place. At Para 72 of the case diary, statement of this petitioner, Santosh Kumar Rajaj has been recorded and he has stated that similar points which have been taken by the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner in course of arguments. At para-82, statements of the Nazir (victim) has been recorded, who has named this petitioner and stated that he opened firing and subsequent thereupon received injury. At Para-85, statements of Md. Nafis has been recorded, who has also supported the case of the prosecution. At para-86, statement of one Md. Jakir has been recorded, who has also supported the case of the prosecution. At para-118, report of the State Forensic Laboratory, Jharkhand, Ranchi, compared the bullet which was fired from the official pistol of the petitioner and also bullet was received by Md. Nazir and report thereof is as follows :– Conclusion : – It is therefore, concluded that the fired deformed jacketed bullet marked “A” noted in item (2) has been fired from the 9 mm caliber regular semi-automatic pistol bearing No. “SP0158380” Marked “P” noted in item (1). 18. Taking all these facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail and hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. Application rejected.