Lalji Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.36201 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -51 Year- 2015 Thana -DHANSOI District- BUXAR ======================================================
1. Lalji Singh
2. Viranjan Singh Both sons of Late Harisharan Singh, and resident of village - Gop Pur, P.S. Sikraul, District - Buxar
3. Sheo Shankar Singh, S/o Late Collector Singh, Resident of village - Mangol Pur, P.S.- Sikraul, District - Buxar .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashwini Kumar Rai, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-11-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dhansoi P.S. Case No.51 of 2015 for allegedly having committed the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 324 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Sri Sandeep Singh, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Buxar. Earlier, case diary, in the present case, was called for, which has since been received.
The allegation against the petitioners is that they fired at one Kanhai Singh leading to injuries.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36201 of 2015 (3) dt.09-11-2015 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case on account of the fact that earlier there was a case registered by these petitioners against the informant's in-laws for having murdered the father of Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and only in order to put pressure on them, the entire family has been implicated in connection with the present case.
Learned counsel for the State after perusal of the case diary submits that there is sufficient material in the case diary indicating that the petitioners had come with premeditation for doing away the father of the informant to death but somehow he escaped from the injuries, which are alleged to have been mentioned in the F.I.R., and are also found reflection in the injury report.
Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances and the materials available in the case diary, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. It is, accordingly rejected.
(Anjana Mishra, J) PNM U T