Tripurari Kumar Tiwari @ Manish Kashyap v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3325 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2021 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Tripurari Kumar Tiwari @ Manish Kashyap Son of Udit Kumar Tiwary Resident of Village - Rampurwa, P.S.- Majhauliya, Distt.- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bimlesh Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Anurag Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-07-2022 Heard both parties.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Majhauliya P.S. Case No. 193 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 323, 353, 385, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Prosecution case in brief is that on the alleged date and time of occurrence, this petitioner along with four unknown persons entered into chamber of informant and started misbehaving and abusing in filthy language. They also disturbed the work of State Bank of India, Paras Pakri Branch, prepared the video with his associates and posted the same on social media.

It is submitted that petitioner is Editor-in-Chief of New Channel Sach Tak Media Pvt. Ltd. Having got some

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3325 of 2022(2) dt.26-07-2022 2/2 feedback from the customers and local people news reporter, had gone to cover the news. It is next submitted that in order to cover up his fault this false case has been lodged. There is no criminal force applied so no case under Section 353 IPC is made out against the petitioner.

Counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioner is named in the FIR and there is allegation of creating nuisance and abuse against this petitioner. Moreover he has got criminal antecedents of eight cases. Considering the nature of accusation and criminal antecedents, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner abovenamed on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T