Patna High CourtCR. MISC./25303/2025dismissed

Anuj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-02Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25303 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-697 Year-2022 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran ====================================================== Anuj Kumar Son of Jhunu Babu Singh Resident of Village - Gaibandhi, P.S. - Phenhara, District - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Gajendra Rai @ Gajindra Rai Son of Late Nandu Rai Resident of Village - Gaibandhi (Gabandhi), P.S. - Fenhara / Phenhara, District - East Champaran 3.

Surendra Rai Son of Late Nandu Rai Resident of Village - Gaibandhi (Gabandhi), P.S. - Fenhara / Phenhara, District - East Champaran 4.

Suraj Rai @ Sujay Rai Son of Phulendra Rai Resident of Village - Gaibandhi (Gabandhi), P.S. - Fenhara / Phenhara, District - East Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kundan Rathore @ Kundan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajit Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 02-05-2025

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application has been filed by the petitioner, who is the complainant of Complaint Case No. 697 of 2022, for cancellation of bail granted by this Court to Opposite Party Nos. 2 to 4, vide order, dated 06.02.2025, passed in Criminal Misc. No. 457 of 2025, on the sole ground that the Opposite Party Nos. 2 to 4 have concealed the fact regarding issuance of process under Section 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on 05.12.2024, i.e.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25303 of 2025(2) dt.02-05-2025 2/2 prior to the order granting bail to the Opposite Party Nos. 2 to 4.

3. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned and have gone through the materials available on record.

4. In my opinion, this is not suppression of fact inasmuch as neither the prosecution nor the complainant brought this fact to the notice of this Court. After going through the order granting bail to Opposite Party Nos. 2 to 4, it appears that the Opposite Party Nos. 2 to 4 were granted bail on the merit of the case and on consideration of many other facts.

5. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √