Sukhdeo Mehta And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 26974 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -51 Year- 2014 Thana -RATANPURA District- SUPAUL ======================================================

1. Sukhdeo Mehta S/o late Khushi lal Mehta.

2. Santosh Kumar @ Bhola Mehta S/o Sukhdeo Mehta

3. Raju Mehta @ Raja S/o Sukhdeo Mehta All are resident of village- Lalman Patti ward no. 14, P.S.- Ratanpura, District- Supaul.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Shankar Modi Mr. Kamal Kishore Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3.

25-07-2016 Heard Sri Binod Shankar Modi, learned counsel, who was assisted by Sri Kamal Kishore Singh, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Kumar Veerendra Narayan, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

Three petitioners, who are named as accused in Ratanpura P.S. Case No. 51 of 2014 registered for offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail. It was submitted by learned counsel for petitioners that in the F.I.R., there is only allegation that petitioners were participants in the occurrence, whereas, there is no allegation of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26974 of 2016 (3) dt.25-07-2016 2/2 any overt act. Learned counsel for petitioners, by way of referring to F.I.R., submits that it is a case, in which one of the co-accused namely Pramod Mehta, having masket in his hand, fired, which hit the victim, who died.

Keeping in view the allegation in the F.I.R. itself, there is no reason for extending the privilege of anticipatory bail. The petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U T