Lalan Roy v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6442 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-269 Year-2023 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna ====================================================== Lalan Roy S/o Late Rajendra Ray R/o Village- Jethuli, PS- Nadi, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 07-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Nadi P.S. Case No. 269 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 448, 380, 307, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that on 15.08.2023, while the informant was at her home, the petitioner, along with other accused persons, entered into her house, armed with lathi, danda, etc., started abusing and when objected, the accused persons assaulted the informant, her daughter and daughter-in-law and co-accused Gaurav Kumar opened fire and started searching the son of the informant and also took away a sum of Rs. 24,000/- kept in the box.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6442 of 2025(2) dt.07-02-2025 2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the parties are neighbours, residing in the same locality and the allegation against the petitioner is not specific and is general and omnibus in nature. There is specific allegation of assault against co-accused Gaurav Kumar.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner is having seven criminal antecedents.
6. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner is having criminal antecedents and appears to be habitual offender, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer of petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) Siwani/- U T