Ravi Shekhar Singh @ Puttu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3204 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2021 Thana- BARURAJ District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

RAVI SHEKHAR SINGH @ PUTTU SINGH S/o Surendra Singh R/o village- Sisma, P.S.- Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur 2.

Anil Kumar Singh S/o Badri Nath Singh @ Anil Singh R/o village- Sisma, P.S.- Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur 3.

Aman Singh @ Aman Kumar Singh S/o Surendra Singh R/o village- Sisma, P.S.- Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur 4.

Pritam Singh S/o Dun Bahadur Singh R/o village- Sisma, P.S.- Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioners.

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Alok Kumar Alok For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 12-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within four weeks. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Baruraj P.S. case No. 78/21 registered for the offences punishable under Section 364/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned J.M. 1st Class, Muzaffarpur.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3204 of 2022(2) dt.12-07-2022 2/2 petitioners that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. Petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case at the behest of the local Mukhiya due to political rivalry. As a matter of fact, the victim has never been kidnapped nor he has been medically examined at any point of time and out of a conspiracy he made his statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as tutored. 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 considering the fact that the victim returned on the same day.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T