Vijay Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2886 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-429 Year-2019 Thana- BIKRAMGANJ District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

VIJAY SINGH S/o - Late Maina Singh Resident of Village- Turti, P.S.- Bikramganj, Distt- Rohtas 2.

Pintu Singh @ Pintu Kumar @ Pintu Kumar Singh S/o - Vijay Singh Resident of Village- Turti, P.S.- Bikramganj, Distt- Rohtas 3.

Dhanjee Singh S/o - Late Maina Singh Resident of Village- Turti, P.S.- Bikramganj, Distt- Rohtas ... ... Petitioners.

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 06-12-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Bikramganj P.S. case No. 429 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341/323/504/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M., Bikramganj.

The petitioners in association of other accused persons are said to have assaulted the informant sustaining head injury. The reason behind the occurrence is said to be land dispute.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2886 of 2020(3) dt.06-12-2021 2/2 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. Petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case due to land dispute. There is case and counter case between the parties. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioners is serious in nature, hence they do not deserve anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected. However, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order on the very date of surrender. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T