Patna High CourtCR. MISC./39466/2017dismissed

Ashok Jha And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2017-09-11Mr. Justice Sanjay Priya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.39466 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -139 Year- 2017 Thana -BARHARA District- PURNIA ======================================================

1. Ashok Jha,

2. Arun Jha, both sons of Mangalpati Jha, resident of village- Sukhsena, P.S.- Barhara, District- Purnea.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pranav Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 3/ 11-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in Barhara P.S. Case No.139 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 447, 341, 323, 354, 379, 307, 504, 506/34 Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, II, Purnea.

As per written report, there is allegation against these petitioners of assaulting Bhabhi of the informant on her head with bamboo.

Case diary was called for, which has been received, wherein, injury report is mentioned in para 42. The doctor has found fracture of right temporal bone and the injury was found to be grievous in nature.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39466 of 2017 (3) dt.11-09-2017 2/2 Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that injured was discharged on 20.06.2017 as will appear from Discharge Summary attached with the case diary, but in the Discharge Summary, it is mentioned that the patient was referred to higher centre for better management.

After CT Scan, the doctor found fracture of right temporal bone and the injury was found to be grievous in nature. In such circumstances, this Court does not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

Prayer of the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.

Petitioners may surrender before the Court below and seek regular bail, which shall be considered and disposed off in accordance with law on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Sanjay Priya, J) JA/- U T