Chandan Rai@ Chandan Kumar Rai @ Chandar Kumar Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15912 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-296 Year-2020 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Chandan Rai @ Chandan Kumar Rai @ Chandar Kumar Ray, Son of Chandrashekhar Rai, Resident of Village Purvi Ajnaul, ward no.11, P.S. Dalsingsarai, District Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. H.A. Khan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 12-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual court proceedings. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No.296 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 448, 341, 323, 324, 307, 354, 379, 380, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is said to have pulled the sari of the informant and made her naked. The petitioner is also said to have assaulted the informant and her son with farsa causing injuries to them.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that there is case and counter

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15912 of 2021(2) dt.12-01-2022 2/2 case between the parties and both sides sustained injuries. It is submitted that the entire family members of the petitioner have been made accused in the present case. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail application. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner and Jag Bandhu Rai. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the injuries are grievous in nature.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.) Sanjay/- U T