Mantu Singh And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.7438 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-802 Year-2018 Thana- BHABHUA District- Bhabhua (Kaimur) ======================================================
1. Mantu Singh, aged about 23 years, Male, Son of- Late Shivparikshit Singh Resident of Village-Sion, P.S. Bhabua, Dist. Kaimur at Bhabua.
2. Dharmendra Singh, 25 years, Male, Son of- Mahabali Singh, Resident of Village-Khiri, P.S. Bhagwanpur, Dist. Kaimur at Bhabua. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajani Kant Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
In this case, the petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Bhabua P.S. Case No. 802 of 2018 registered for offences under sections 147/148/149/341/323/504/506/307/353/448/427 of the Indian Penal Code.
An allegation has been made that on 21.11.2018 at about 16.45 O'clock, the accused persons along with their associates dashed the main gate of the Registry Office and started to hurl abuses. When the Constables came, they fled away. Again they came after 45 minutes in a Gypsy along with motorcycle armed with different weapons and tried to enter into
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7438 of 2019(2) dt.11-02-2019 2/2 the office by breaking open the lock of the gate, on protest, they caused injuries to the Informant. They have caused serious injury to Bhupendra Singh, Dharmendra Singh and Manoj Singh. The accused persons have also ransacked the guard room and threatened that if he will lodge a police case, it will lead to dire consequences.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no direct allegation against the present petitioners. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case as also the nature of allegation made against the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.
If the petitioners surrender before the court below within a period of three weeks from today and pray for bail, the court below, without being prejudiced by this order, will take a decision in accordance with law.
(Shivaji Pandey, J) rishi/- U T