Amarjeet Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11035 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2019 Thana- KUDHNI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

AMARJEET RAI Son of Julum Rai Resident of Village - Ladaura, P.S.- Kudhani (turki, o.p.), District - Muzaffarpur. 2.

Lalu Rai Son of Julum Rai Resident of Village - Ladaura, P.S.- Kudhani (turki, o.p.), District - Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kunwar Ajit Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-06-2020 This matter is taken up for consideration through Video Conferencing under the orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

Heard counsel for the parties.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Kudhani (Turki O.P.) P.S. Case No. 106 of 2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 342, 323, 307, 379, 386, 188, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case in brief is that on 23.02.2019 at 4.30 pm, the informant received information that these petitioners were cutting soil at government land. When the informant reached there he saw petitioners along with 5 to 6 persons

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11035 of 2020(3) dt.16-06-2020 2/2 cutting soil, he asked why they are doing so, then all the accused persons started assaulting him with lathi, danda and petitioner no. 2 snatched gold chain and ring from the informant. It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against him. There is land dispute between the parties. Injuries have been found to be simple in nature. Considering the facts aforesaid and nature of offence and the fact that petitioner has got criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T