Patna High CourtCR. MISC./53541/2024bail rejected

Birendra Yadav @ Birendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-28Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53541 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-319 Year-2023 Thana- KHUSRUPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Birendra Yadav @ Birendra Kumar S/O SHIV BALAK YADAV R/O - Baikunthpur, P.S.- KHUSRUPUR, DIST- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sikandar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-08-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 504, 506, 307, 353 of the IPC in connection with Khusrupur P.S. Case No.319 of 2023.

3. The learned counsel submits petitioner has antecedent of three cases and the informant alleges that on information he reached the place of occurrence to pacify the fight which occurred between two groups, further the accused persons started throwing glass bottles which hit the informant causing injury on leg and the petitioner along with other accused was identified by the Chowkidar and local people.

4. The learned counsel submits petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53541 of 2024(2) dt.28-08-2024 2/2 further submitted that allegation of throwing bottle is general and omnibus in nature. It is not the case of the informant that it was petitioner who threw the bottle causing injury on his leg.

5. The learned APP, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that petitioner has antecedent of three cases and then the allegation is of assaulting a police officer who had gone to discharge his duty and he also suffered injury.

6. Considering the submission made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Prakash Narayan U T