Patna High CourtCR. MISC./28412/2016rejected

Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Rai And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2016-12-14Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.28412 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -725 Year- 2015 Thana -DANAPUR District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Rai

2. Sonu Kumar @ Sanu Kumar @ Sonu

3. Manish Rai @ Manish Kumar. All are sons of Umesh Rai

4. Umesh Rai S/o Late Arjun Rai All R/o Ram Nagar Colony,Danapur P.S. Danapur, District-Patna .... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Manoj Kumar (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 14-12-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned A.P.P. for the State.

In this application for anticipatory bail the petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 725 of 2015 for the offences punishable under sections 147, 452, 354 (B), 504 and 506 of the I.P.C.

Allegedly, the petitioners and other FIR named coaccused caused threats to kill the informant, torn her Sari and Buloj and tried to outrage her modesty and the occurrence has taken place on the order of petitioner no.4 to compromise the case bearing number Danapur P.S. Case No. 100 of 2015 which was for

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28412 of 2016 (5) dt.14-12-2016 2/2 the murder of husband of the informant.

Submission is of false implication and that the petitioners have been made victim of the circumstances, they were not involved in such crime, they have got clean antecedents and as such the petitioners deserve sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for bail by submitting that the petitioners committed the crime to put pressure to compromise the earlier case.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, I am not inclined to grant privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners and accordingly their such prayer stands rejected in connection with the above mentioned case pending in the court of A.C.J.M. Danapur.

However, in case and if so advised the petitioners surrender and seek regular bail then their prayer for regular bail shall be considered on its own merits without being prejudiced by the order of this Court, preferably on the same day. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T