Ramjee Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18317 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-347 Year-2019 Thana- SAHPUR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

RAMJEE RAI SON OF SHIV PUJAN RAI @ SHIV PUJAN RAY R/O VILLAGE- MAKSUDPUR, P.S- SHAHPUR , DIST - PATNA 2.

BIRENDRA RAI SHIV PUJAN RAI R/O VILLAGE- MAKSUDPUR, P.SSHAHPUR, DIST- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ghanshyam Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr.Kumar Uday Pratap ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 28-06-2022 Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceedings. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within stipulated period, office will place the matter before the Bench. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Sahpur P.S. Case No.347/19, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 302, 380 of the IPC. The allegation against the petitioners is that they along with other accused persons have indiscriminately assaulted the informant's side by means of various weapons. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18317 of 2021(4) dt.28-06-2022 2/2 petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case only on suspicion. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation leveled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that some of the co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate bench of this Court. During investigation, nothing has come against the petitioners and petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that there is ample evidence against the petitioners in the case diary and they have taken active part in the occurrence. In fact, the mother of the informant died due to the injuries.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners named above on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is rejected. The instant application is dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T