Patna High CourtCR. MISC./21417/2019rejected

Niraj Kumar Jha @ Dhaniya Jha v. The State Of Bihar

2019-04-05Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21417 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2018 Thana- KHANPURA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Niraj Kumar Jha @ Dhaniya Jha Son of Pawan Jha, Resident of Village - Shahpur, P.S.- Khanpur, Distt.- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jay Prakash Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 05-04-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Khanpur P.S. Case No.167 of 2018 registered under Sections 387, 379 and other minor sections of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleged that while he was standing near Chhath Ghat on eve of Chhath Pooja, the petitioner all of a sudden came on a motorcycle and assaulted the informant with fists and slaps after abusing him and the petitioner also snatched a chain made of gold from possession of the petitioner only because the informant did not give him ransom. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. The wife of the petitioner lodged a complaint case which was also sent to the police station for institution of case but it appears that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21417 of 2019(2) dt.05-04-2019 2/2 complaint was filed only after institution of the present case. There is specific allegation that the petitioner without any rhyme and reason came at the Chhath Ghat where the informant was standing and assaulted the informant with fists and slaps and snatched a chain made of gold from possession of the informant.

Having considered the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Harish/- U T