Alok Tiwari @ Ram Das @ Ramu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31212 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-402 Year-2023 Thana- CHENARI District- Rohtas ====================================================== Alok Tiwari @ Ram Das @ Ramu S/o- Manoj Tiwari Village- Pachokhar PsBaburi Dist- Chadauli U.P ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 25-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Chenari P.S. Case No. 402 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 354(B), 379, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, later on Section 302 of the I.P.C. was added.

3. As per the prosecution case, all the accused persons armed with deadly weapons, came into the house of the informant and started assaulting informant's father. It is further alleged that the petitioner assaulted one Seema Pandey.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31212 of 2024(3) dt.25-09-2024 2/2 case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that the postmortem report has not supported the prosecution case. He further submits that the petitioner is son-in-law of the deceased. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that during the course of treatment the informant's father died. It is further submitted that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of assaulting the father of the informant.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the fact that there is specific overt act against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T