Patna High CourtCR. MISC./42338/2024bail rejected

Shesshnath Gope v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-22Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42338 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2023 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

SHESSHNATH GOPE SON OF LATE JAGDISH GOPE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - JETHULI, P.S. - NADI, DISTRICT - PATNA, BIHAR 2.

KISHAN RAI @ KRISHNA PRASAD SON OF RAM PRATAP RAI @ RAM PRATAP GOPE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - JETHULI, P.S. - NADI, DISTRICT - PATNA, BIHAR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners :

Mr. Saket Anand, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, APP For the Victim :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-07-2024 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120B, 395, 307, 436, 427 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, on the alleged date and time of occurrence, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including these petitioners, and about 200 unknown persons ransacked a community hall and damaged official vehicles and looted valuable articles. It is further alleged that they also opened firing and injured several police personnel.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42338 of 2024(2) dt.22-07-2024 2/2 behalf of the petitioners that though petitioners are named in the F.I.R., there is no specific accusation against these petitioners. They are simply alleged to be member of the mob.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the victim have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and submitted that these petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and they damaged several vehicles and injured several police personnel.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and nature of accusation, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T