← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./16376/2015rejected

Parshuram Kumar Singh And ORS. v. The State Of Bihar

2016-01-05Justice Smt. Anjana Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.16376 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -110 Year- 2013 Thana -NAYAGAON District- SARAN ======================================================

1. Parshuram Kumar Singh S/o Late Ramagya Singh

2. Prince Kumar@ Manu S/o Parshuram Kumar Singh

3. Preetam Kumar@ Golu S/o Parshuram Kumar singh All residents of Village- chaturpur, P.s- Nayagaon, District- Saran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar For the Informant : Mr. Kamlesh Prasad Yadav For the State : Mr. Gulnar Begum, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 05-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Nayagaon P.S.Case No. 110 of 2013 instituted under Sections 448, 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of learned C.J.M., Chapra.

In the present case, case diary was called for, which has been received.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is a case and counter case between the parties and both sides have sustained injuries.

Learned counsel for the informant submits that the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16376 of 2015 (5) dt.05-01-2016 2/2 petitioner has come to the house of the informant and after having dragged out the aged mother was trying to assault her and wanted that he should appropriate the pension, which was being given to the old lady. It is further submitted that the mother of the informant did not want to stay with the other sons, namely, the petitioners as their family members had not taken good care of her.

Having considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also because the petitioners being aggressors and had inflicted several wounds on the informant, which have been corroborated by the injury report, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners and it is accordingly rejected. (Anjana Mishra, J) singh/- U T