Santosh Kumar Singh @ Santosh Kr. And ORS. v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.31709 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -60 Year- 2017 Thana -BARHARA District- BHOJPUR ======================================================

1. Santosh Kumar Singh @ Santosh Kr., Son of Dhirender Singh,

2. Rohit Kumar Singh, Son of Uma Shankar Singh,

3. Dharmendra Singh, Son of Achmun Singh,

4. Siku Singh, Son of Manjee Singh, All are Resident of Village- Pararia, Police Station- Barhara in the District of Bhojpur.

5. Tudi Dusadh, Son of Late Bashisth Dusadh,

6. Paldhari Singh @ Om Prakash Singh, Son of Sheodeyal Singh, Both are Resident of Village- Barhara, P.S.- Barhara in the District- of Bhojpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : None.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 13-07-2017 Heard Sri Ranjeet Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners.

No one appears for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Barhara P.S. Case No. 60/2017 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 447, 307, 337, 338, 353, 427, 440, 290, 436, 332, 333, 395, 397/120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although the petitioners are named in the F.I.R. among 118 persons, however, there is no specific allegation against them. It

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31709 of 2017 (2) dt.13-07-2017 2/2 appears that eight of the accused persons, who were arrested on the spot, have been granted bail as appears from the impugned order of the learned Sessions Judge, Ara. It appears that a similarly situated accused Raj Vardhan Singh had earlier moved this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 20953/2017 and his application was rejected vide order dated 01.07.2017 passed by a co-ordinate bench of this Court.

In the facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

However, if the petitioners surrender and pray for regular bail, the same shall be considered by the learned magistrate on the basis of the materials keeping in view that there is no specific allegation against the petitioners and such other submissions which may be raised on their behalf at the time of consideration.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Dilip, AR U T