Patna High CourtCR. MISC./10107/2024dismissed

Tetra Mian @ Imran Mian @ Imran Milan @ Tetar Mian v. The State Of Bihar

2024-02-22Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10107 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-230 Year-2021 Thana- DULHIN BAZAR District- Patna ====================================================== Tetra Mian @ Imran Mian @ Imran Milan @ Tetar Mian Son of Islam Mansuri @ Islam Mian R/o vill - Ainkhan, P.S. - Dulhin Bazar, Distt. - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rudra Deo, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dinesh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 22-02-2024 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 230 of 2021 instituted under Sections 324/307 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 20.11.2021 by the informant, Sudai Thakur.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant has alleged that he is having a store in the market. On the day, his son who was to appear in the examination had come to the place when this petitioner came, purchased some item and thereafter, left the place without paying the cost. Upon demand of payment, he took out a knife and pierced in the abdomen of the victim. Accordingly, the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though there has been allegation, from the injury report, it does

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10107 of 2024(2) dt.22-02-2024 2/2 not seem that the same is grievous in nature.

5. Considering the kind of allegation that has come against the petitioner that he went to the shop, purchased the item, without paying it tried to leave the place, the son who was to attend his examination demanded money whereafter he was injured by the knife blow of the petitioner. In that background, so far as the anticipatory bail is concerned, the petitioner does not deserve the same.

6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application stands dismissed.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T