Patna High CourtCR. MISC./19837/2024bail rejected

Dilip Das @ Dileep Das v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-01Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19837 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2022 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Dilip Das @ Dileep Das, Son of Pradeep Das R/o vill - Gangauliya, P.S. - Saraiya, Distt. - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Upendra Kumar Chaubey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dinesh Singh- A.P.P.

Mr. Hemant Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-07-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in Saraiya P. S. Case No.265 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 341, 323, 307, 354, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, at the outset, submits that co-accused Ravi Sah @ Ravi Kumar along with three other had moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail application by filing Cr. Misc. No.59787 of 2022 and same was rejected by an order dated 21.11.2022. It is next submitted that the facts of the case was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19837 of 2024(2) dt.01-07-2024 2/2 recorded in detail in Cr. Misc. No.59787 of 2022. It is also submitted that this petitioner is alleged to have assaulted the son of the informant causing injury on head. It is next submitted that this petitioner is also alleged to have assaulted the deceased by danda.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T