Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32879/2022rejected

Dev Narayan Sharma @ Deo Narayan Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

2023-02-16Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32879 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2014 Thana- PIPRA District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.

DEV NARAYAN SHARMA @ DEO NARAYAN SHARMA S/o Chhutaharu Sharma R/o village- Shayam Nagar, P.S.- Triveniganj, DistrictSupaul 2.

Krishana Sharma @ Sri Krishana Sharma S/o Dev Narayan Sharma R/o village- Shayam Nagar, P.S.- Triveniganj, District- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Naresh Kumar Mehta, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Sen Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 16-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Pipra P.S. Case No. 07 of 2014 registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 325, 353, 379, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant case due to dirty village politics. Further submission is that the allegation of assaulting the informant is completely false and injuries have been caused by members of mob. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32879 of 2022(5) dt.16-02-2023 2/2 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of bail and submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioners in the first information report of assaulting and causing injury to the informant which is also corroborated by the injury report. He therefore, submits that petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioners 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 bail is accordingly rejected.

anuradha/- (Arvind Srivastava, J) U T