Arvind Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17680 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2017 Thana- RAIYAM District- Darbhanga ====================================================== ARVIND PASWAN Son of Sonelal Paswan Resident of Village - Mohanpur, P.S.- Raiyam, Distt - Darbhanga.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 10-07-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Tr. No.655 of 2018 arising out of Raiyam P.S. Case No.52 of 2017 registered under Sections 341, 323, 447, 354(B), 324, 307, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected by order dated 05.04.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No.17716 of 2018.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after investigation, the police submitted final form finding the case true only under different bailable Sections of Indian Penal Code but cognizance was taken under Sections 354(B) and 324 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code that is why the petitioner again moved this Court for grant of anticipatory bail

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17680 of 2019(2) dt.10-07-2019 2/2 but I find that there is very specific allegation that it was petitioner who not only tried to outrage the modesty of the sister of the informant but is also alleged to have given repeated blow with knife in the abdomen and hand of the informant. The doctor of course opined the injury to be simple in nature but two incised wound and one scratch were found on the person of the informant. One stab injury was found on the vital part, in the mid of abdomen.

It is evident that even after rejection of bail of the petitioner on 05.04.2018, the petitioner evaded his appearance from Court by more than one year and again filed this anticipatory bail on the ground that the police did not find the case true under Section 354(B) and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, the accusation is very much that it was petitioner who gave repeated dagger blow on different parts including the vital part of the body of the informant.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is once again rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T