Raj Kumar @ Gabbar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44115 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -274 Year- 2015 Thana -BHAGWAN BAZAR District- SARAN =========================================================== Raj Kumar @ Gabbar son of Ramayodhya Rai Resident of Village-Nayaka Tola, Shyamchauk, P.S. Bhagwan Bazar, District Saran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sadanand Paswan, APP =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 18-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Special P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Bhagwan Bazar P.S. Case No. 274 of 2015 dated 03.10.2015 instituted under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3(2)(v) of The Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The allegation against the petitioner is of assault leading to death of the husband of the informant due to the reason that he was doing business of cattle.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not named in the F.I.R. and only on the re-statement of father of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44115 of 2016 dt.18-10-2016 2/2 informant, his name has been introduced and he is not connected with the entire episode. It is further submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent. Learned counsel draws the attention of this Court to order dated 11.04.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 3393 of 2016 by which a co-ordinate Bench has granted anticipatory bail to co-accused Ravi Rai and Putul Rai.

Learned Special P.P. opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the fardbeyan itself discloses that there were 1015 unknown persons, who brutally assaulted the husband of the petitioner and naturally, during investigation, names have come. It is submitted that such act is a clear reflection of intolerance prevailing, inasmuch as, just because the deceased was transporting cattle, he was beaten to death for being in such business.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The application, accordingly, stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Anjani/- U T