Saheb Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12904 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2023 Thana- KOPA District- Saran ====================================================== Saheb Singh S/o Late Nagendra Singh R/o Village-Sadhpur Bali, P.S.-Kopa, District-Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 14-03-2024 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kopa P.S. Case No. 117 of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 341, 323, 324, 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next submitted that allegation against the petitioner is of assaulting the informant and his father with knife, when the injury suffered by the injured has been found to be caused by a hard blunt substance.

4.

The learned APP vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the order

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12904 of 2024(2) dt.14-03-2024 2/2 impugned clearly records that -- "There is specific allegation against the petitioner who has caused injury with knife on the forehead and left GASSA of informant, Daroga Pandit. Learned advocate for informant has submitted document of treatment and photographs of injured, multiple injuries have been found on the person of all the injured including vital parts of the body."

5.

It is next submitted that if what has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner is true in that event the facts as recorded in the order impugned, ought to have been rebutted in the anticipatory bail application, but the same having not been done, amply demonstrates that the injured suffered injuries caused by knife.

6.

In view of the submission made by the learned APP, the court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.

Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is dismissed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T