Pappu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44164 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-332 Year-2023 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
PAPPU KUMAR Son of Rajeshwar Rai Resident of village - Nasriganj, Biscut Factory, P.S. - Danapur, Distt. - Patna 2.
Ravindra Rai @ Ravindra Kumar Son of Rambabu Rai Resident of village - Nasriganj, Biscut Factory, P.S. - Danapur, Distt. - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-08-2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the present anticipatory bail application with respect to petitioner no. 1 (Pappu Kumar).
3. Permission is accorded.
4. The petitioner no. 2 apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 307, 326, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases.
6. The informant alleges that the accused persons including the petitioner assaulted him with lathi on his back while Vikash and Aniket assaulted by leg and fist and Pappu snatched
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44164 of 2023(2) dt.24-08-2023 2/2 Rs. 5,000/- while Umesh and Guddan fired at Mithilesh causing injury on left arm and thereafter the accused fled giving threat.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that though it is alleged that petitioner assaulted by lathi on back of the informant, but then the injury suffered is simple in nature and is not on vital part of the body.
8. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
9. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner no. 2 above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 332 of 2023 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T