Babloo Kumar And ANR. v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.17339 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -212 Year- 2014 Thana -NARHAT District- NAWADA ======================================================
1. Subodh Singh @ Karu
2. Pramod Singh @ Pramod Kumar Both are sons of Jay Nandan Singh, Both are Resident of village- Barat, P.S.- Narhat (Sitamarhi), District- Nawada .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.19412 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -212 Year- 2014 Thana -NARHAT District- NAWADA ======================================================
1. Babloo Kumar
2. Gautam Kumar All are sons of Jay Nandan Singh, All are Resident of Village - Barat, P.S. - Narhat (Sitamarhi), District - Nawada.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.17339 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vinod Gautam, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s: Mrs. Sahin Begam (APP) (In Cr.Misc. No.19412 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vinod Gautam, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s: Mr. Yogendra Kumar (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 25-06-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Having regard to the nature of allegation against the petitioners for offence under Sections 307 and other allied offences of the Indian Penal Code and the fact that four persons from the prosecution side have sustained head injuries attributed to all these petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17339 of 2015 (3) dt.25-06-2015 2/2 bail merely because there is subsequent counter version of the same occurrence. It has to be kept in mind that neither there is any averment made in the bail application nor there is any material to show that there were similar serious injuries on the side of the petitioners. That being so, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected. But then, nothing said in this order however shall come in the way of the petitioners in surrendering and making prayer for regular bail and if they do so, their prayer for regular bail shall be considered on its own merits without being prejudiced anything made in this order.
(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Sujit/- U