Parmeshwari Risideo And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.48795 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -274 Year- 2016 Thana -NARPATGANJ District- ARRARIA ======================================================
1. Parmeshwari Risideo, son of Bihari Risideo,
2. Hiranand Risideo, son of Sattan Risideo,
3. Sachin Risideo, son of Hiranand Risideo,
4. Mahesh Risideo, son of Lakhichand Risideo,
5. Dhiren Risideo @ Dhirendra Risideo, son of Parmeshwari Risideo.
6. Biren Risideo @ Birendra Risideo, son of Parmeshwari Risideo, All are Resident of Village- Farhi, Ward No. 8, P.S.- Narpatganj, Dist.- Araria.
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ashok Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-12-2016 At the very outset, Sri Ramesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, in presence of Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as Mr. Enamul Haque, learned counsel, who has voluntarily appeared on behalf of the informant, submits that during pendency of the present petition, petitioner no.3, namely, Sachin Risideo has already been arrested.
Accordingly, anticipatory bail petition, so far as petitioner no.3 is concerned, stands dismissed as the same has become infructuous.
Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48795 of 2016 (2) dt.06-12-2016 2/2 for the petitioners, Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as Mr. Enamul Haque, learned counsel for the informant.
Petitioners, in the present case, have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail in Narpatganj P.S. Case No.274 of 2016 registered for the offence under Sections 447, 341, 323, 354, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that in the present case, F.I.R. was lodged much belatedly and the petitioners have falsely been implicated. He submits that prior to lodging of the F.I.R. a Sanha was lodged by one of the petitioners of the present case, namely, Birendra Risideo. On the aforesaid ground, a prayer has been made for grant of anticipatory bail. However, after going through the F.I.R. the Court is of the opinion that it is not a case for grant of anticipatory bail.
The petition stands dismissed.
(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U T