Patna High Court/1336/2021dismissed

Golu Kushwaha v. The State Of Bihar

2021-12-14Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1336 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-370 Year-2020 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West Champaran ====================================================== Golu Kushwaha, Son of Yadunandan Kushwaha @ Yadu Nandan Prasad, R/O Village -KOIRI Tola, P.S.- Bettiah (TOWN), District- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Akhileshwar Dayal, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 14-12-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove all the defects as pointed out by office within four weeks after start of normal functioning of the Court. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, learned A.P.P. for the State. Petitioner in the present case is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Bettiah (Town) P.S. Case No. 370 of 2020 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 326, 307, 379, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is alleged to have given knife blow twice on the chest of the informant's son and third blow caused injury on his right palm.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1336 of 2021(3) dt.14-12-2021 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that during investigation the injured has stated that the petitioner caused injury on his back. Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner. Having regard to the materials showing that in the F.I.R. this petitioner has been named as an assailant and further the injured has in his statement recorded in paragraph '21' of the case diary supported the allegation that this petitioner has actively participated in the alleged occurrence though he has stated that the petitioner has given knife blow on the back side of the injured, the injury report is corroborating the allegations, therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, thus, refused.

The application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) vats/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.