Pappu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33946 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2023 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Pappu Kumar Son of Dinesh Ray Village Jethuli PS Nadi, District- Patna 2.

Dinesh Ray Son of Late Mahtab Ray Village Jethuli PS Nadi, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dhirendra Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Renu Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120B, 395, 307, 436, 427 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, all the F.I.R. named accused persons including these petitioners pelted stones and fired upon police party. It is further alleged that accused persons also burnt police vehicles, parked outside the godown.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case only on suspicion. Allegation is general and omnibus and no specific

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33946 of 2024(7) dt.10-01-2025 2/2 overt act has been alleged against petitioners.

5. However, learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that as per F.I.R. itself, these petitioner alongwith others pelted stones, fired upon police party, as a result of which, some of the police personnel sustained injury. He further submits that anticipatory bail petitions of two co-accused namely Chandan Kumar and Rajiv Kumar have already been rejected by this Court, vide order dated 19.06.2024 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 31216/2024 and order dated 04.07.2024 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 36577/2024.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioners is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T