Vinay Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14048 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2013 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.

Vinay Kumar Son of Late Ram Bahadur Rai 2.

Ravindra Kumar Son of Late Ram Bahadur Rai 3.

Birendra Kumar Son of Late Ram Bahadur Rai 4.

Devendra Kumar Son of Late Ram Bahadur Rai All are residents of Village- Hilalpur, P.S.- Industrial Area, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 13-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP representing the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 283 of 2013, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 325, 307, 427, 379, 387 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioners is that petitioners along with other co-accused persons assaulted the brother of the informant as well as driver of bus by means of iron road, pistol, etc. and also snatched a sum of Rs. 25,000/- and one mobile phone from the brother of the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14048 of 2019(4) dt.13-09-2019 2/2 though the FIR was lodged in the year 2013, the petitioners were not having any knowledge about the present FIR and has not filed any application for anticipatory bail in the year 2013, whereas similarly situated persons have been released on anticipatory bail by the court below itself in the year 2013. He further submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case due to business rivalry and they nave not committed any offence in the manner alleged.

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners have filed application for anticipatory bail after a lapse of five years, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. This application is, accordingly, rejected.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) S.Katyayan/- U T