Prince Kaushik Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5666 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2018 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran ====================================================== PRINCE KAUSHIK KUMAR Son of Anil Tiwari Resident of VillageShankar Saraiya, P.S.- Turkauliya, Distt- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dhurendra Kumar,Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Singh,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 18-06-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned App for the State.

The petitioner in the present case is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Turkauliya (Raghunathpur) P.S. Case No. 60 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner and co-accused Abhishek Tiwari is that both had assaulted one Gaya Mahto by Farsa causing serious injury on his both hands. It is however submitted that no such injury has been found on the body of the victim. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Attention of this Court has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5666 of 2020(4) dt.18-06-2020 2/2 been drawn towards the injury report annexed as Annexure '2' to the present application which shows that the injured Gaya Mahto has suffered as many as five lacerated wounds on his hand.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case wherein, there is a specific allegation against this petitioner that he had assaulted one Gaya Mahto along with co-accused Abhishek Tiwari and have caused injuries on his both hands which is getting corroborated from the injury report available at Annexure '2' to this application, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The application stands dismissed.

In case the petitioner surrenders and prays for regular bail in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, his prayer for regular bail shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order of this Court. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/Arvind U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.