Satynarayan Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18041 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2018 Thana- KANHAULI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== SATYNARAYAN PRASAD Son of Late Dasrath Bhagat Resident of Village - Bishanpur Adhar, P.S.- Kanhauli, District - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar Bihar 2.
Guru Prasad Son of Late Jimdar Bhagat Resident of Village - Bishanpur Adhar, P.S.- Kanhauli, District - Sitamarhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Birendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Choubey Jawahar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 20-08-2019 This application has been filed for cancellation of the bail granted to the O.P.no.2, vide order dated 23.10.2018 passed by the learned District Judge, Sitamarhi in Cr. Misc. No.1109 of 2018.
Grounds for cancellation of the bail bond is that the Opposite Party No.2 is pressuring the complainant in the present case, for which she has filed a complaint petition before the court below, which is annexure-3 , however, the learned counsel for the petitioner in the present case admits this fact that the above complaint is still pending for inquiry. Further submission is that he has not considered the materials available on the record.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18041 of 2019(2) dt.20-08-2019 2/2 Heard learned A.P.P.
Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances as stated above when there is only allegation of pressurising against against the petitioner and that has been sent to the police for investigation after registration of the case but that investigation is still pending and so far other submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that it appears from the order of the learned Sessions Judge that he has applied his mind and considering the fact that both the parties are related and they are uncle and nephew and further there is land dispute, he has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail.
Considering the above fact, I find no merit in this application, as such this application is dismissed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U T