Sintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35284 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2015 Thana- NALANDA District- Nalanda ====================================================== SINTU KUMAR SON OF SHAILENDRA KUMAR @ SALIM MAHTO R/O- VILL-NEERPUR, P.S.- NALANDA, DIST.- NALANDA. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 15-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Nalanda P.S. Case No.60 of 2015, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 435, 436, 506 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the FIR, informant is running a primary school at her house and on 28.06.2015 unlawful assembly of 400-500 persons entered into her school and started to assault her. When her husband came there to save her, the accused persons brutally assaulted him as a result of which he died. They also set the school on fire alongwith two fourwheelers. Petitioner is said to be a member of the mob. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35284 of 2022(3) dt.15-05-2023 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail petition. It is fairly submitted that some of the co-accused persons have been granted regular bail and some of the co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by submitting that there is ample evidence against the petitioner in the case diary. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby rejected.

However, if petitioner surrenders before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the learned court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner preferably on the same day without being prejudiced by this order of rejection. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) S.KUMAR/- U T