Dharamveer Kumar @ Guddu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35081 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-437 Year-2020 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

DHARAMVEER KUMAR @ GUDDU Son of Nageshwar Prasad Resident of Village- Minapur, P.S.- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur. 2.

DEEPAK KUMAR Son of Nageshwar Prasad Resident of Village- Minapur, P.S.- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur.

3.

PREM KUMAR Son of Nageshwar Prasad Resident of Village- Minapur, P.S.- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur.

4.

Nageshwar Prasad Son of Late Devnandan Bhagat Resident of VillageMinapur, P.S.- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shanti Bhushan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-07-2022 Prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioners No. 1 and 4 has already been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 22.09.2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

Petitioners No. 2 & 3 apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 307, 379 and some other ancillary Sections of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, petitioner No.2 assaulted the informant by means of spade on his head and petitioner No.3

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35081 of 2021(4) dt.04-07-2022 2/2 assaulted the informant with spade on his leg and the injuries have been found to be grievous in nature.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the case. It is submitted that FIR has been lodged after 17 days of the occurrence without any explanation. Petitioners have got clean antecedent.

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Considering the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners No. 2 and 3 on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) BKS/- U T