Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34453/2016rejected

Pintu Kumar @ Sanjeev Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2016-11-18Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.34453 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -264 Year- 2007 Thana -MUNGER MUFFASIL District- MUNGER ====================================================== Pintu Kumar @ Sanjeev Kumar S/o Shib Shankar Singh, resident of Village- Dariyapur, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Munger. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Prem Shankar Singh @ Bittu Singh, son of Ram Sevak Singh , resident of village- Sshitalpur, P.S. Muffasil, District-Munger .... .... Opposite Paries ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhaskar Shankar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Akbar Ali ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 18-11-2016 Heard.

The petitioner prays for anticipatory bail in Muffasil P.S. Case No.264/2007 registered for the offence under Sections 307, 379, 341, 363, 323, 342, and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case was registered on 19.12.2007, wherein the petitioner has been named, whereas the present application has been filed in the year 2016.

The allegation is that the petitioner along with others intercepted the informant and started assaulting. When the villagers tried to intervene, the petitioner is said to have assaulted the informant with butt of pistol on his head. He also opened fire. Out of fear the villagers started fleeing away. All the accused

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34453 of 2016 (3) dt.18-11-2016 2/2 persons kidnapped the informant with intention to kill him. However, due to intervention of the people, he could save his life. On the basis of a compromise, entered several years thereafter, the present application for anticipatory bail has been filed. Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail contending that on perusal of the records, it appears there is allegation attributed against the petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances, in my view, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) NKS/- U T