Ram Vinay Rai @ Vinay Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23781 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-424 Year-2019 Thana- SURSAND District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== RAM VINAY RAI @ VINAY RAI S/o Upendra Rai R/o Village- Parri, P.S.- Sursand, District- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Alok Kumar Alok For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pranav Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 08-10-2020 As of now, the Courts have not resumed normal physical hearing. The matter has been listed today for consideration through Video Conferencing.

Learned counsel are appearing and making submissions from their residence. The Court master and Secretary are also part of this virtual Court proceedings with the aid of audio visual technology.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State .

Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected to honor his undertaking given in the instant case for depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defects as pointed out by office when called upon.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23781 of 2020(2) dt.08-10-2020 2/3 Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sursand P.S. Case no. 424 of 2019 instituted for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 324, 379, 354 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

While the informant was weeding the grass, it is alleged that the petitioner and others have indulged in assault claiming right title and possession over the area. Petitioner's counsel submits that it is a case arising out of land dispute. At the spur of moment. The petitioner's side has also lodged Sursand P.S. case no. 425 of 2019 against the informant's side. The petitioner bears clean antecedents and the injury report shows that the victim has suffered simple injury.

The learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail by submitting that from the injury report the assault on head attributed to the petitioner has been found to be corroborated. This fact has been taken note of by the the Additional District and Sessions Judge IX, Sitamarhi while rejecting the petitioner's prayer for bail. The petitioner being the main accused of assault duly corroborated by the injury report may not be allowed the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23781 of 2020(2) dt.08-10-2020 3/3 privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the rival submissions, this Court is not inclined to allow the petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail.

Prayer for bail stands rejected.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) shyambihari/- U