Basuki @ Basukinath Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21107 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2022 Thana- SHRI NAGAR District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.

Basuki @ Basukinath Jha S/O Madan Mohan Jha, Resident Of Vill- Ram Nagar Mahesh, Ward No. 10, P.S.- Srinagar, Dist- Madhepura. 2.

Sudhakar Jha S/O Late Bhayankar Jha, Resident Of Vill- Ram Nagar Mahesh, Ward No. 10, P.S.- Srinagar, Dist- Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kumar Vishoka Nand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-03-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Srinagar PS Case No. 01 of 2022, FIR dated 01.01.2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 327, 384, 379, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Earlier the petitioners have moved before this Hon'ble Court for grant of anticipatory bail in Cr. Misc. No. 24953 of 2022, which was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 12.12.2022.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21107 of 2024(2) dt.13-03-2024 2/2 petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case and the allegation levelled in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioners have not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. He lastly submits that there is case and counter-case between the parties. 5.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that this is the second anticipatory bail application of the petitioners, whose earlier anticipatory bail application was dismissed for non-prosecution by this Court vide order dated 12.12.2022 and the best course of action for the petitioners would be to restore the Cr. Misc. No. 24953 of 2022, but petitioners have filed the second anticipatory bail application, which is not permissible under the law. 6.

In view of the aforesaid, the present application stands dismissed.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Shahnawaz/- U T