Shatrughan Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23435 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2021 Thana- GOVINDGANJ District- East Champaran ====================================================== Shatrughan Prasad Son of Late Bigan Sah Resident of Village - Puranderpur, Ward No.- 02, P.S.- Malahi (Govindganj), District - East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Madhurendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in Govindganj (Malahi) P. S. Case No. 321 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 341, 307, 447, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substance Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of five cases and the informant alleges that petitioner, his brother threw bomb at him which caused injury to their sister, thereafter again petitioner threw two bombs injuring the informant. Further, they are having dispute relating to land.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23435 of 2025(2) dt.30-04-2025 2/2

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant, who is his own brother as they are having dispute relating to property. It is further submitted that though it is alleged that petitioner threw bomb causing injury to their sister and the informant but then no injury report is on record.

5. The learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that the tenor of allegation is serious in nature. It is also submitted that process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued and petitioner has antecedent of five serious criminal cases, as such, if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, petitioner may abscond.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T