Deepak Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51457 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2019 Thana- MANER District- Patna ====================================================== DEEPAK KUMAR S/o RAMDIP RAI R/o TILLU TOLA, P.SNAUBATPUR, DISTRICT-PATNA. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Nirmala Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 06-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual Court proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within four weeks. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Maner P.S. Case No. 197/2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 379, 427, 504 & 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned J.M. 1stClass, Danapur.

The petitioner in association of other co-accused is said to have assaulted the informant with an intention to make

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51457 of 2021(2) dt.06-05-2022 2/3 pressure for compromising the case earlier lodged against him. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to previous enmity. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that all the sections are bailable except Section 379 IPC. The allegation of theft is against other co-accused. Petitioner has five criminal antecedents as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that five criminal cases have already been lodged against the petitioner, except this one and considering the fact that petitioner assaulted the informant to make pressure for compromising the case registered against him, he does not deserve anticipatory bail by this Court. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51457 of 2021(2) dt.06-05-2022 3/3 accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T