Sujit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1516 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2012 Thana- BIKRAMGANJ District- Rohtas ====================================================== Sujit Kumar, S/o Baban Singh, R/o Village- Jarlahi Mathia P.S. Bikramganj, District- Rohtash at Sasaram.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramchandra Singh, adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. (DR.) INDIWAR KUMARI ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-01-2018 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 379 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case as per the written report of informant, Shyam Bihari Singh is to the effect that on 29.06.2012, the informant came at village Jarlahi Mathia during marriage ceremony of his son Sanjay Kumar, when dance was being performed, then the co-accused Ladunia, Dhan Kumar, Sujit Kumar and Jwala Singh came and assaulted Aditya, the other son of the informant. However, the matter was pacified at that time. Thereafter, at 3 A.M., all the accused persons came and again started abusing the informant, whereupon, co-accused Ladunia assaulted on the head of Deepak with lathi, while co-accused Vicky Kumar, also assaulted with lathi. It is further alleged that co-

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1516 of 2018(2) dt.11-01-2018 2/2 accused Ladunia snatched a bag containing Rs.60,000/- and handed over it to this petitioner and escaped from the scene. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is on inimical terms with the informant, as informant has lodged altogether five cases against the petitioner due to land dispute, in which he is on bail. Though the case was registered in 2012, but the petitioner could not prefer anticipatory bail since the petitioner was not arrested by virtue of privilege conferred under Section 41A of the Cr. P.C. It is further submitted that other accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 05.09.2012, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 33589 of 2012.

Considering the nature of accusation being made in the background of litigated relationship between the parties, it is a case for consideration of prayer for regular bail by the learned Court below, if the petitioner surrenders within a period of six weeks in connection with Bikramganj P.S. Case No. 169 of 2012, pending before the learned SDJM, Bikramganj.

With the above observation, this application is, accordingly, disposed of.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Ashwini/- U T