← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./21917/2023bail rejected

Niranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2023-07-05Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21917 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-337 Year-2022 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

NIRANJAN KUMAR SON OF NANDA RAY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HARIHARPUR BHIKHI ,P.S PAROO, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR 2.

RANJAN KUMAR SON OF NANDA RAY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HARIHARPUR BHIKHI ,P.S PAROO, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Nitu Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 05-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehends their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are person with clean antecedent and on account of land dispute the occurrence took place wherein the informant alleges that petitioner No. 1 assaulted him by sword causing injury on his head while petitioner No. 2 assaulted him by an iron rod.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21917 of 2023(2) dt.05-07-2023 2/2 petitioners have been falsely implicated on account of land dispute.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that there is specific allegation of assault against he petitioner further the impugned order itself record that the injury suffered by the injured is grievous in nature.

Considering the submission made by the learned APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Hence, the present anticipatory bail application is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Adnan/- U T