← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./11902/2015rejected

Shambhu Singh And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2015-03-27Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.11902 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -330 Year- 2014 Thana -MUFFASIL District- AURANGABAD ======================================================

1. Shambhu Singh S/o Daroga Singh

2. Shatrudhan Singh S/o Late Rampati Singh Both Resident of Mohalla Gayatri Nagar, P.S. Aurangabad (T), District Aurangabad. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bachan Jee Ojha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 27-03-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Aurangabad (M) P.S. Case No. 330 of 2014 registered for the offence under Sections-325, 307, 380 & other minor sections of the Indian Penal Code.

There is specific allegation against these petitioners that they assaulted the informant by means of iron rod. The contention on behalf of the petitioners is that the informant has sustained simple injury as no X-ray report has been placed either before the investigating officer or before the court below and moreover, parties have already entered into

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11902 of 2015 (2) dt.27-03-2015 2/2 compromise, which is obvious from perusal of the impugned order.

In view of the aforesaid submissions as well as facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners stands rejected.

However, if, the petitioners surrender in the court below within four weeks from today and seek regular bail, the concerned court shall consider the regular bail petition of the petitioners on its own below without being prejudiced by this rejection order particularly, keeping in mind the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties as well as the nature of injury sustained by injured.

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) A.K.V./- U T