Dhrup Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40940 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-805 Year-2020 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran ====================================================== DHRUP SINGH SON OF SHRI PRABHU NATH SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - SISWA, POLICE STATION - MARHAURA, (GAURA O.P.), DISTRICT - SARAN, CHAPRA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Umesh Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Marhaura (Gaura O.P.) P.S. Case No. 805 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 341, 323, 324, 307, 427, 354 & 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code. While the informant was sleeping in her house, all the named accused persons including this petitioner are said to have armed with Daab and other weapons entered inside her house and started abusing and assaulting her causing injury on her head.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40940 of 2020(5) dt.03-01-2022 2/2 that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to land dispute. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He further submitted that the S.D.P.O. after supervising the case has submitted final form against the petitioner.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that as the final form has been submitted against the petitioner, hence he does not deserve anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case and particularly considering the criminal antecedents, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T