Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37413/2024bail rejected

Naulesh Ravidas @ Naulesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-23Mr. Justice Khatim Reza2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37413 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-559 Year-2023 Thana- ISLAMPUR District- Nalanda ====================================================== Naulesh Ravidas @ Naulesh Kumar S/O Sharban Ravidas R/O VillageKasturi Bigha, P.S- Islampur, Distt.- Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP For the Informant :

Ms. Kumari Sujata Sinha Adv.

Ms. Salu Sinha, Advocates ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 23-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Islampur P.S. Case No. 559 of 2023 dated 05.10.2023 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 341,323,325, 307 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Later on Section 302 of the IPC has been added.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, over a dispute of drainage of water quarrel took place between the informant's daughter-in-law and accused persons, namely, wife of Soni Ravidas, mother and Naulesh Ravidas @ Naulesh Kumar (petitioner). Allegation against the petitioner is that he assaulted on the back of head of the informant's daughter-in-law by

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37413 of 2024(3) dt.23-08-2024 2/2 means of bamboo causing head injury, as a result of which, she fell down and blood started oozing out. Thereafter, the accused persons fled away.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that petitioner has no intention to kill the deceased and there is no allegation of repetition of blow. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

5. Learned APP as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioner is the main assailant.

6. Case diary was called for which has been received. The postmortem report annexed with case diary corroborates the allegation against the petitioner 7.Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.

8. The application stands disposed of.

(Khatim Reza, J) shyambihari/- U T