Satyendra Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9004 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -498 Year- 2014 Thana -BHABHUA District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR) ====================================================== 1Satyendra Singh Son of Shiv Murat Singh Resident of Mohalla - Bhabua Ward No. 20, P.S. Bhabua, District - Kaimur ( Bhabua ) .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Sunil For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Hirday Prasad Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 27-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bhabhua P.S. Case No. 498/2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 307, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present case has been lodged against this petitioner only because he was an informant in the case filed by him involving the murder of his other son. He further submits that in the said case the informant and his son were both the accused persons and there is a serious dispute between them and the accused persons. Learned counsel for the informant has seriously contended

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9004 of 2015 (3) dt.27-04-2015 P2/2 that the present petitioner Satyendra Singh is the kingpin who is engaged in such offences in which both the sides are being prejudiced one after the other. Previously also, another case had been registered in which the informant was also one of the accused persons.

Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the son of the petitioner has been refused bail by this Court. Considering the nature of allegation and series of litigations between the parties, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to this petitioner. It is thus, rejected.

However, considering the fact that there is no specific allegation against this petitioner in connection with this case, in the case if he surrenders within a period of three weeks, it will be open for the Court below to pass appropriate orders in the given facts and circumstances without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjana Mishra, J) Saif/- U T