Anil Chaudhary @ Anil Choudhry @ Anil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.11227 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -200 Year- 2016 Thana -CHANDAUTI District- GAYA ====================================================== Anil Chaudhary @ Anil Choudhry @ Anil Kumar, Son of Ramji Chaudhary, Resident of Village- Pirbigha, P.S.- Chandauti, (Chakand), District- Gaya.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivendra Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri S. Ehteshamuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 16-03-2017 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dayal learned APP for the State.

Apprehending his arrest in Chandauti (Chakand) P.S. Case No. 200 of 2016 registered under sections 302 and 120-B/34 IPC, the petitioner has filed the present application for grant of anticipatory bail.

While the father of the informant was sitting near the wall, it is alleged, the accused persons arrived there. Thereafter, the petitioner assaulted on the neck of the father with Pasuli. His brother assaulted with Patta on his head. Resultantly, the father of the informant died.

The contention of the petitioner is that the injury

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11227 of 2017 (3) dt.16-03-2017 2/2 sustained on the neck does not support the allegation. It was a free fight between the parties over the land dispute. The accused persons have also lodged a case under section 307 IPC against the present prosecution side.

Mr. Dayal, on the other hand, opposed the prayer and submitted that it is a serious offence. The allegation is specific against the petitioner. In course of investigation, the witnesses have supported the prosecution case.

Looking to the seriousness of the allegation attributed to the petitioner and other materials reflected from the record, I am not persuaded to extend the petitioner the privilege of anticipatory bail. Prayer is rejected.

The order present shall, however, not prejudice the case of the petitioner if he surrenders and prays for bail. (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) HR/- U T