Rohit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20666 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2021 Thana- KARJA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

ROHIT KUMAR S/O DAULAT RAM R/o village- Salahpur, P.S.- Karja, District- Muzaffarpur 2.

Daji Bharti @ Deji Bharti W/o Dinesh Kumar Diwakar @ Dinesh Ram R/o village- Salahpur, P.S.- Karja, District- Muzaffarpur, Presently residing with husband at Moh- Chhote Kalyani, Bahalkhana Road, Ambekdar Nagar, P.S.- Town, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Parasmani For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 323, 325, 332, 333, 341, 353, 307, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, when the informant alongwith other police officials went to arrest Chandan Kumar, it is alleged that these petitioners abused, pelted stones, as a result of which, some of the police officials got injured and also tried to get the accused free from police custody. It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. There is no specific overt act against these petitioners. Petitioner no. 1 is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20666 of 2022(2) dt.01-09-2022 2/2 brother of co-accused Chandan Kumar, whereas, petitioner no. 2 is his married sister and she has got no concern with the said incident. She was even not present at the place of occurrence and she has been falsely implicated in this case because she is sister of co-acused.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner no.1 is refused. So far as prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner no. 2 is concerned, since she is lady and has got no concern with the said occurrence, in the event of her arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, she is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. V, Muzaffarpur in connection with Karja P.S. Case No. 160 of 2021, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T