Chandeshawar Paswan @ Chaneshar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29457 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2019 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna ====================================================== CHANDESHAWAR PASWAN @ CHANESHAR PASWAN Son of Late Shivshanker Paswan, Resident of Village-Potahi, Post-Basuhar, Police Station-Punpun, District-Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anshuman For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mohammed Arif ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-09-2019 This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Punpun (Patna) P.S. Case No. 46/19, disclosing offences under Sections 147,148, 149, 341, 323, 325, 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner is of assault to the informant by means of rod causing fracture injury to him. Apart from that it appears that petitioner is accused in one more case. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner as the informant has tried to kidnap the daughter of accused no. 4, some scuffle has taken place and although there is allegation of assault but the injury sustained by the informant was not found grievous in nature.

Heard learned A.P.P. also as well as learned counsel for the informant. They have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29457 of 2019(5) dt.19-09-2019 2/2 of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that apart from the present case and the case mentioned in paragraph - 3 of the petition, petitioner is accused in one more case, which he has not mentioned in his petition and further, informant has filed the counter affidavit, which shows that on 01.11.2018, learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. II, Patna has convicted the accused - petitioner in Sessions Trial No. 161 of 1999 and directed him to be released on probation of good conduct for a period of two years and keep peace but prior to that petitioner indulged in such type of case.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner rather petitioner should surrender before the court below and make prayer for regular bail and if any such application is filed, the court below will dispose of the same on the merit of the case, if possible on same day, without being prejudiced by this order.

This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunilkumar/- U T