Pravin Kumar @ Pravin Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43731 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2024 Thana- SUPPI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Pravin Kumar @ Pravin Singh S/o Lalkishor Singh R/o Vill- Mradpur Narkatiya, P.S.- Suppi, Distt- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 16-07-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner who apprehend arrest in connection with Suppi P.S. Case No. 81/2024 lodged on 02.05.2024, for the offences punishable under sections 341, 323, 325, 354B, 379, 506, 509 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66C, 67, 67A of the I.T. Act.

3. As per the prosecution, the F.I.R. has been lodged against three named accused persons, including the petitioner. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that the petitioner had previously uploaded photographs of the informant's sister on social media, for which an earlier F.I.R. was lodged against him, and he was sent to jail. However, after his release, he again started uploading her photographs on social media and used to follow her whenever she went outside. Upon protest, the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43731 of 2025(2) dt.16-07-2025 2/2 allegedly assaulted the informant's father with a knife. When the informant attempted to rescue his father, all the accused persons allegedly tried to slit the informant's neck with a knife.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner, and the entire accusation is omnibus and general in nature. Furthermore, although the alleged occurrence took place on 19.04.2024, the F.I.R. was lodged only on 02.05.2024 after a delay of 13 days which remains unexplained. It is also submitted that the informant and the petitioner are co-villagers, and a pre-existing dispute persists between their families. The petitioner is, however, an accused in one other criminal case.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail.

6. In this background, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Suppi P.S. Case No. 81/2024, pending before the learned CJM, Sitamarhi is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Ashwini/- U T