Sakaldeep Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.72425 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-240 Year-2018 Thana- SIRDALA District- Nawada ====================================================== Sakaldeep Sharma S/o Naresh Sharma, Resident of Village-Barbibigha, P.S.- Sirdalla, District-Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sheo Kumar Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sri Binod Kumar 2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioner is languishing in custody since 23.08.2018 in connection with Sirdalla P.S. Case No.240 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 326, 307, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Prosecution case as per the written report of Manti Devi submitted to Sidalla P.S. is to the effect that on 08.08.2018 about 7 P.M., the petitioner and co-accused Jitu Sharma came on the land of informant and started demolishing the hut erected on the said land. When the husband of the informant made protest, then all accused persons abused to the husband of the informant and the petitioner assaulted with iron road to the husband of the informant causing fracture injury on his hand, leg and teeth.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.72425 of 2018(4) dt.24-01-2019 2/2 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the background of land dispute, accusation has been levelled against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the injury report has been prepared in a private hospital which suggests that the informant's husband received injury in some other manner.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the State that the petitioner is the main assailant and four fracture injuries have been caused due to assault by the petitioner. Considering the nature of accusation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. However, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after completing one year of custody. (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) sanjeev/- U T