Pradeep Singh @ Pradeep Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50247 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-227 Year-2020 Thana- MOHANIYA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== 1.

PRADEEP SINGH @ PRADEEP KUMAR SINGH Son of Sheo Pujan Singh Resident of village - Barej, P.S. - Mohania, District - Kaimur at Bhabua.

2.

SHIOBALI SINGH @ SHIO BALI SINGH Son of Late Haunman Singh Resident of village - Barej, P.S. - Mohania, District - Kaimur at Bhabua. 3.

JYOTI KUMAR @ JYOTI PRAKASH SINGH Son of Shiobali Singh @ Shio Bali Singh Resident of village - Barej, P.S. - Mohania, District - Kaimur at Bhabua.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 07-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Mohania P.S. Case No.227 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 307, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioner No.1, Pradeep Kumar is said to have assaulted Brajesh, the son of the informant, on his head by means of Garasa due to which Brajesh became unconscious and fell down on the ground. Petitioner No.2, Shiobali Singh is said to have assaulted, Ram Bahadur Singh by means of lathi.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50247 of 2021(4) dt.07-07-2022 2/2 Petitioner No.3, Jyoti Kumar and other co-accused persons, namely, Mathura and Prayag Singh are said to have caught the hair of the informant and snatched locket made of gold from the informant.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that there is case and counter case between the parties and both sides sustained injuries. It is submitted that there is no specific overt act against the petitioners and petitioners have got one criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail application. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submitted that the injuries are grievous in nature.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.) Sanjay/- U T