Patna High CourtCR. MISC./7541/2019rejected

Mithu Kumar @ Mritunjay Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2019-02-08Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7541 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-281 Year-2018 Thana- WARISLIGANJ District- Nawada ======================================================

1. Mithu Kumar @ Mritunjay Kumar, S/o Pappu Singh @ Gopesh Kumar, Resident of Village Jawahar Park, P.S. Warisaliganj, District Nawada.

2. Nitish Kumar, S/o Tanik Singh, Resident of Village Bilari, P.S. Katarisarai, District Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bipin Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Prem Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 08-02-2019 Heard both sides.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in Warisaliganj P.S. Case No.281 of 2018 registered under Sections 307, 386 and other minor sections of the Indian Penal Code. The informant named the petitioners along with other accused persons and alleged that they demanded extortion of Rs.50,000/-. When the informant protested, the petitioners and other accused persons indiscriminately assaulted the informant and snatched cash from the chest of the shop. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are of course named in the FIR but no specific allegation of assault is made against the petitioners. Petitioner no.1 is a student and examinee of intermediate, the Admit Card

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7541 of 2019(2) dt.08-02-2019 2/2 of which is annexed as Annexure-3 but from perusal of the FIR, it appears that the petitioners and others thrashed the shopkeeper only on the refusal of payment of extortion and the informant got as many as seven injuries on different parts of his body. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U T