Patna High CourtCR. APP (SJ)/1638/2017disposed

Manoj Singh @ Manoj Kumar Singh Andors v. The State Of Bihar

2017-08-21Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.1638 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -225 Year- 2015 Thana -MANJHI District- SARAN ======================================================

1. Manoj Singh, Son of Late Jagddish Singh,

2. Santosh Singh@ Santosh Kumar Singh

3. Buchul Singh @ Dhananjy Kumar Singh @Nagendra Singh, Both Son of Late Satyendra Singh,

4. Sanoj Singh , Son of Guput Singh,

5. Rohit Singh @ Rohit Kumar Singh, Son of Suresh Singh,

6. Shivam Singh @ Shivam Kumar Singh, Son of Late Nagmani Singh,

7. Sushant Singh @ Shushant Kumar Singh @ Mohit Singh,

8. Prashant Singh @ Sumit Singh, Both Sons of Manoj Singh,

9. Golu Singh @ Golu @ Aditya Singh @ Aditya Kumar Singh , Son of Santosh Singh, All are R/o Village- Durgapur, P.S.- Manjhi, District- Saran. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Anant Kumar Bhaskar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 21-08-2017 Heard the parties.

The appellants are apprehending their arrest in Manjhi P.S. Case No.225 of 2015 for the offences under Sections341, 323, 379,504, 147 of I.P.C. and Section 3(i)(xi) and 3(i)(xi) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Allegation as per the F.I.R. against the appellants is of abusing and assaulting the informant and snatching her Mangalsutra and Jiutiya.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1638 of 2017 (4) dt.21-08-2017 2/2 Submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is that there is case and counter case between the parties from before and reason of lodging this case is to grab the land of the informant by the appellants.

Heard learned Special P.P. also. and he opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground of enmity between the parties.

Having heard both sides, this appeal is not maintainable, rather the appellants to surrender before the court of Special Judge and pray for regular bail, who shall consider on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order of this Court on the same day.

With the aforesaid observation this appeal is disposed of.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) AnilKrSinha/- U