Patna High CourtCR. MISC./7071/2020bail rejected

Najrul Haque v. The State Of Bihar

2020-08-24Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No 7071 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2019 Thana- ANGARH District- Purnia ====================================================== NAJRUL HAQUE S/o Late Haji Abdul Rahman Resident of VillagePirgachi, P.S.- Angarh, Distt- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms Meena Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 24-08-2020 As of now, the Courts have not resumed normal physical hearing. The matter has been listed today for consideration through Video Conferencing.

Learned counsels are appearing and making submissions from their residence. The Court Master and Secretary are also part of this virtual Court proceedings with the aid of audio visual technology.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

Petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Angarh Police Station (for brevity, PS) Case No 26 of 2019 instituted for the offence punishable under Section(s) 341, 323, 324, 307, 504/34 of Indian Penal Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7071 of 2020(5) dt.24-08-2020 2/2 It is alleged that the instant petitioner along with other family members have assaulted the informant's father. It is submitted by the petitioner's counsel that the specific assault has been attributed against the petitioner on the head which was found simple in nature. It is further submitted that paragraph 17 of case diary, which is the victim's statement, does not state about the specific assault.

Learned APP for the State, with reference to injury report, submits that there are three injuries upon the victim. Injury No 3 is grievous in nature. Petitioner is main accused. Considering the rival submissions, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected. This Court, however, would observe that rejection of the petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail by this Court should not be taken against the petitioner while considering his regular bail. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U T