Rajnish Kumar @ Tunnu @ Tunnu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32685 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2018 Thana- NARHATT District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.

RAJNISH KUMAR @ TUNNU @ TUNNU SINGH Son of Bhola Singh Resident of Village - Sahabajpur Sarai, P.S.- Sitamarhi, Dist.- Nawada. 2.

Manish Kumar @ Tamatar Son of Bhola Singh Resident of Village - Sahabajpur Sarai, P.S.- Sitamarhi, Dist.- Nawada. 3.

Santosh Kumar Son of Late Bhola Singh Resident of Village - Kulna, P.S.- Akbarpur, Dist.- Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Birendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. J.K. Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 09-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 326, 307, 504, 506, 379, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act registered in connection with Narhat (Sitamarhi) P.S. Case No. 99 of 2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the backdrop of admitted land dispute and there is case and counter case between the parties. There is delay in institution of the FIR on 29.04.2018 for alleged occurrence of 26.04.2019. Similarly situated co-accused Ajay Kumar and Chhotu Kumar @ Anish Kumar have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 40980 of 2018. The petitioners claim clean antecedents.

4. Learned APP opposes the petition submitting that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32685 of 2019(3) dt.09-08-2019 2/2 the informant has received as many as six injuries out of which two injuries on the head are said to be grievous and attributed to the accused persons.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed.

chandran/- (Vikash Jain, J) U T