Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32180 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-317 Year-2020 Thana- PAKARIBARAW District- Nawada ====================================================== Chandan Kumar Son Of Manoj Kumar @ Priya Ranjan Singh Resident of Village- Dhewadda, P.S.- Pakribarawan, District- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Ranjan Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 21-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through the virtual court proceeding.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within three weeks. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 378 and 308/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with one Manoranjan Singh attacked upon the informant by means of iron rod resultantly he became unconscious. It is also alleged that they snatched Rs. 50,000/-, golden ring and golden tabiz from the informant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32180 of 2021(2) dt.21-01-2022 2/2 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that there is general and omnibus allegation levelled against the petitioner. Doctor who examined the informant has found injury is simple in nature. He further submits that petitioner has two criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this application.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits injuries found upon the informant are grievous in nature which is mentioned in the impugned order. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected in connection with Pakribarawan P.S. Case No. 317 of 2020. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T