Chandeshwari Mahto @ Chandeshwar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38830 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2020 Thana- PARSA District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Chandeshwari Mahto @ Chandeshwar Mahto, Male, aged about 58 years, son of Late Sricharan Mahto.

2.

Rakesh Kumar Mahto @ Rakesh Mahto, Male, aged about 25 years, son of Raj Narayan Mahto.

3.

Kauleshwar Mahto, Male, aged about 51 years, son of Late Sricharan Mahto.

All are resident of Village - Fatehpur, P.S. Parsa, District - Saran (Chapra) ... ... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Dr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-10-2021 Heard learned advocate for the petitioners, learned APP for the State and learned advocate for the informant. The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in connection with Parsa P.S. Case No.164 of 2020 registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 504 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

Though there is no specific allegation against the petitioners and the allegation is general and omnibus but, eight persons are said to have been injured and out of them, two have been referred to Patna Medical College and Hospital, for further treatment. In such circumstance, learned counsel for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38830 of 2020(2) dt.21-10-2021 2/2 informant prays for rejecting the prayer for anticipatory bail. He also brings to the notice of this Court to an order dated 15.04.2021 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 38010 of 2020, in which the prayer of the similarly situated persons in the same F.I.R. has been rejected.

In such a situation, I see no reason to differ with the reasonings of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioners is rejected.

The petitioners are directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of two weeks from today and seek regular bail, if so advised.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) pawan/- U T