Binod Ray @ Binod Kumar Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36595 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-687 Year-2023 Thana- KOILWAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Binod Ray @ Binod Kumar Ray Son of Late Deo Prasad Resident of Village - Chakia, P.S.- Doriganj, District - Saran (Chapra). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bhaskar Shankar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar No.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 26-06-2024 Heard Mr. Bhaskar Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dilip Kumar No.1, learned A.P.P. for the State

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Koilwar P.S. Case No. 687 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 147, 148, 149 & 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bhojpur at Ara.

3. The petitioner along with other co-accused is said to have attacked on the police party for releasing their boat from the police custody.

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 due to high handedness of police. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36595 of 2024(2) dt.26-06-2024 2/2 general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner is not the eye witness of the occurrence and the constables who were watching the seized boat have not disclosed the name of the petitioner. Petitioner has two criminal antecedents of similar nature of the offence.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that he along with others attacked on the police party and resorted firing. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, 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