Bhaganu Thakur @ Mangani Thakur v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28495 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2018 Thana- BARGAINIA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== 1.
BHAGANU THAKUR @ MANGANI THAKUR, aged about 62 years, Male, Son of Late Jagdish Thakur Resident of Village - Parsauni, P.S.- Bairgania, Distt - Sitamarhi.
2.
Mukesh Thakur Son of Bhaganu Thakur @ Mangani Thakur, aged about 39 years, Male, Resident of Village - Parsauni, P.S.- Bairgania, Distt - Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sunil Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Awadhesh Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 02-05-2019 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and the State.
Petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Barignia P.S. Case No. 188 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under section 307 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegations levelled against these petitioners are general and omnibus in nature. They have been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. Petitioners are men of clean antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28495 of 2019(2) dt.02-05-2019 2/2 2019 Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioners are named accused in the first information report and there is specific allegation of assault by means of farsa and iron rod against them. During investigation, materials have come showing complicity of these petitioners in the alleged crime. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is, therefore, rejected.
(Arvind Srivastava, J) mcv/- U T