Mahesh Singh @ Mahesh Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20636 of 2017 (4) dt.09-08-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20636 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -145 Year- 2016 Thana -HALSI District- LAKHISARAI ====================================================== MAHESH SINGH @ MAHESH PRASAD SINGH, SON OF LATE BISUNDEO SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- PARSAWAN, POLICE STATION- RAMGARH CHAUK, DISTRICT-LAKHISARAI.

.... .... PETITIONER/S

VERSUS

THE STATE OF BIHAR .... .... OPPOSITE PARTY/S ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Renuka Ratnakar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Halsi (Ramgarh Chauk) P.S. Case No. 145 of 2016, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 504, 324, 152, 153, 337, 338, 325, 326, 332, 353 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Lakhisarai. The accusation is that informant being the Circle Officer, Ramgarh Chauk Block, along with police officials reached at the village Parsawan for removing the encroachment in Gairmajurua land in the light of order dated 10.08.2016 passed in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20636 of 2017 (4) dt.09-08-2017 M.J.C. No. 4575 of 2014, where in course of removing the encroachment, 26 persons named in the F.I.R. including the petitioner and 150 unknown persons attached, in which, informant and other police officials sustained injury. At that time, firing was also made by the accused persons and the police officials. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T