Patna High CourtCR. MISC./40740/2019rejected

Bhola Sah @ Ram Sushil Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2019-09-13Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40740 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-143 Year-2018 Thana- RANIGANJ District- Araria ====================================================== BHOLA SAH @ RAM SUSHIL SAH S/o Ramasray Sah Resident of VillageHasanpur, Ward No. 8, P.S.- Raniganj, District- Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 13-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner who is in custody since 22.02.2019 has filed the instant application for grant of bail in connection with Raniganj P.S. Case No. 143 of 2018 (G.R. No.1523 of 2018) registered for the offence punishable under sections 147,148,149,341,323,307,379,504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the allegation in the FIR, the petitioner is alleged to have struck the informant with rod on his head. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. are not supported by the material that has transpired in course of investigation or the injury report of the informant. It is further submitted that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40740 of 2019(3) dt.13-09-2019 2/2 petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 22.02.2019.

The application for bail was opposed by learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that as per the injury report which has been incorporated in the case diary with respect to the instant case, an injury by hard and blunt substance has been found on the head of the informant which corroborates the allegation made in the F.I.R. and the informant has been advised to undergo C.T scan, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and as such the petitioner's application for bail is rejected.

However, petitioner if so advised may renew his prayer for bail after completing one year of custody. (Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash U T