Rajnish Puskar @ Guddu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7733 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-402 Year-2021 Thana- PIRBAHOR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Rajnish Puskar @ Guddu S/O Late Ramlakhan Choudhary R/O MohallaParmeshwar Dayal Lane, P.S.- Pirbahore, District- Patna 2.

Vikash Kumar @ Sonu S/O Late Ramlakhan Choudhary R/O MohallaParmeshwar Dayal Lane, P.S.- Pirbahore, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Upendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 02-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

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

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 447, 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 354, 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioners along with 10 other people armed with weapons came to the house of the informant and starting abusing him. On objection by the informant, all of them

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7733 of 2022(2) dt.02-08-2022 2/3 assaulted by means of iron rod as a result of which he received injury.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case due to land dispute. He submits that the injury found upon the informant is simple in nature. He submits that there is general and omnibus allegation levelled against the petitioners. He further submits that petitioners have one criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this application. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant oppose the prayer for bail and submit that the petitioner was earlier granted bail in a case of similar nature of offence with a condition that they will not commit offence of similar nature but after bail, the petitioners committed similar nature of offence.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected in connection with Pirbahore P.S. Case No. 402 of 2021. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7733 of 2022(2) dt.02-08-2022 3/3