Patna High CourtCR. MISC./54485/2016rejected

Arjun Pandit And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2016-12-23Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54485 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -78 Year- 2016 Thana -TIKAPATTI District- PURNIA ======================================================

1. Arjun Pandit

2. Rinku Pandit @ Rinku Kumar Pandit Both sons of Late Sukhai Pandit

3. Krishna Dev Pandit son of Gopal Pandit

4. Mantu Pandit son of Late Horil Pandit

5. Gopal Pandit son of Late Hitan Pandit All residents of village - Srimatta, Navtolia, P.S. - Tikapatti, District - Purnea. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Atul Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 23-12-2016 Heard.

The petitioners herein are named accused in Tikapatti P.S. Case No. 78 of 2016 registered under sections 307, 379 and 354 IPC. They pray for grant of anticipatory bail. It is alleged that all the petitioners intruded into the house and started assaulting the informant and in the process she was stripped off her garment. When other persons came to rescue, the accused persons assaulted them causing injuries.

It is stated by the petitioners that the present case is a counter blast of Tikapatti P.S. Case No. 77 of 2016 lodged by the present accused party. Out of animosity, the present case has been

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54485 of 2016 (2) dt.23-12-2016 2/2 lodged.

Mr. Dayal, the APP, on the other hand, points out from the FIR that the allegation has specifically been made against these petitioners. Learned Sessions Judge has also noted in the impugned order that there is specific allegation attributed to the petitioner. Corresponding injuries have also been found on the injured persons.

In my view, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Prayer is accordingly refused.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) HR/- U T