Sangita Sinha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40373 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-401 Year-2018 Thana- PATNA CITY CHOWK District- Patna ====================================================== SANGITA SINHA Wife of Shiv Kumar Sinha Resident of Village - Haziganj Patnacity, P.S.- Chowk, Dist.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Annu Sinha Wife of Subodh Kumar Sinha Resident of Village - Simli Tathagat Nagar, Oppsite of S.B.I, Malsalami, P.S.- Malsalami, Dist.- Patna. 3.
Juhi Sinha D/o Subodh Kumar Sinha Resident of Village - Simli Tathagat Nagar, Oppsite of S.B.I, Malsalami, P.S.- Malsalami, Dist.- Patna. 4.
Subodh Kumar Singh Son of Nand Kishore Sinha Resident of Village - Simli Tathagat Nagar, Oppsite of S.B.I, Malsalami, P.S.- Malsalami, Dist.- Patna.
5.
Abhinav @ Monu S/o Subodh Kumar Resident of Village - Simli Tathagat Nagar, Oppsite of S.B.I, Malsalami, P.S.- Malsalami, Dist.- Patna. 6.
Manish @ Tonu Son of Subodh Kumar Sinha Resident of Village - Simli Tathagat Nagar, Oppsite of S.B.I, Malsalami, P.S.- Malsalami, Dist.- Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajesh Mohan For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 03-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
This application has been filed for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the opposite party nos. 2 to 6 vide order dated 02.04.2019 passed in A.B.P. No. 8516/2018 in connection with Chowk P.s. Case No. 401/18.
Ground for cancellation of bail is that at the time of argument for grant of bail, the opposite parties have made
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40373 of 2019(2) dt.03-07-2019 2/2 submission that they have no criminal antecedent and the same has also been recorded in the order dated 02.04.2019 but opposite parties were having criminal antecedents and further opposite party nos. 2 to 6 have suppressed several material facts. Having heard both sides and perused the record, from which it appears that though it has been recorded in the order dated 02.04.2019 that opposite party nos. 2 to 6 have no criminal antecedents, however, they have clearly mentioned in their petition before the court below that petitioner nos. 2, 4 and 5 are accused in one more case, whereas, petitioner no. 1 and 3 have no criminal antecedent.
So far other submission that opposite party nos. 2 to 6 have suppressed the material facts is concerned, it appears that the court below after considering the materials available on record including the F.I.R as well as the materials collected during course of investigation has granted anticipatory bail to opposite party nos. 2 to 6.
As such, I find no merit in the present application and the same is, accordingly, rejected.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunilkumar/- U T