Uttim Chandra Sharma @ Uttim Chand Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45617 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2018 Thana- BHOJPUR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictBhojpur ====================================================== UTTIM CHANDRA SHARMA @ UTTIM CHAND SHARMA S/O Late Jharokha Sharma Resident of Village - Paiga, P.S. - Barhara, District - Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

MANAN KHAN @ ABDUL MANAN KHAN Son of Late Jabar Khan Resident of Village - Paiga, P.S. - Barhara, District - Bhojpur. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Parmeshwar Vishwakarma, Advocate For theState :

Mr. Sadanand Paswan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

This application has been filed for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the opposite party no.2 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.03.2021 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 661 of 2020 in connection with Complaint Case (SC/ST) No. 48(C) of 2018 registered for the offence under Sections 147, 323, 379, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(x) of SC/ST Act. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the opposite party no.2 was granted bail on the ground that there was a land dispute between two sides. However, the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45617 of 2021(6) dt.22-07-2026 2/2 allegations against the opposite party no.2 is that he has forcibly captured the land of the complainant who belongs to the Scheduled Castes category.

4.

Upon careful consideration of the impugned order it appears that the impugned order is dated 05.03.2021 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 661 of 2020 and more than five years have elapsed since then moreover, the learned counsel for the petitioner has not raised any sufficient ground for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. In view of the above, no ground for cancellation of bail is made out. 5.

Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.

6.

The petitioner/prosecution is directed to cooperate in the trial so that the trial can be concluded at the earliest.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) shalini/- U T