Munna Sahani @ Munna Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36586 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-552 Year-2023 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Munna Sahani @ Munna Kumar S/o- Ramayan Sahani @ Ramayan Chaudhary village- Madhopur W.No-5, Ps- Majhauliya Dist- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anish Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 26-06-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Majhauliya P.S. Case No. 552 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 341, 325, 307, 354B, 379, 504 & 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The petitioner along with other co-accused is said to have conjointly assaulted the informant and her family members sustaining injuries to them.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36586 of 2024(2) dt.26-06-2024 2/2 There is land dispute between the parties and several cases have been lodged against each other. It is further submitted that there is delay of 17 days in lodging the F.I.R. without assigning any plausible reason for the said delay. It is further submitted that one co-accused has already been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the injuries sustained by the victim is grievous in nature, hence the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the nature of the injuries, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

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