Gyanendra Kumar @ Sardar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36609 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-182 Year-2017 Thana- RAJAOLI District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.

Gyanendra Kumar @ Sardar Son of Govind Yadav Resident of Village - Sector A Hardiya, P.S.- Rajauli, Distt - Nawada. 2.

Suman Kumar @ Suman Kumar Yadav Son of Govind Yadav Resident of Village - Sector A Hardiya, P.S.- Rajauli, Distt - Nawada. 3.

Mallu Kumar Son of Govind Yadav Resident of Village - Sector A Hardiya, P.S.- Rajauli, Distt - Nawada.

4.

Govind Yadav Son of Late Bulak Yadav Resident of Village - Sector A Hardiya, P.S.- Rajauli, Distt - Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sheo Kumar Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-08-2019 Petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in connection with Rajauli P.S. Case No. 182 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 307, 387, 379, 427, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution story is that the accused persons, including the petitioners assaulted the informant and taken away Rs.10,000/- from the counter of his hotel and snatched gold chain from him and there is allegation of extortion also. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is case and counter case between the parties and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36609 of 2019(3) dt.16-08-2019 2/2 petitioner No.2 is also running a hotel and petitioners' side have also been assaulted and the counter case has been filed earlier to the present case.

Heard learned APP, who has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

In view of above facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. They may surrender and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered on its own merit.

With the above observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U T