Sudhir Ram @ Sudhir Kumar Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50966 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2010 Thana- MAKER District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Sudhir Ram @ Sudhir Kumar Ram SON OF AKLU RAM @ SAJIWAN RAM VILLAGE- JAMALPUR, PS- MAKER, DIST- SARAN 2.

HARENDRA RAM SON OF DEO NANDAN RAM VILLAGEJAMALPUR, PS- MAKER, DIST- SARAN 3.

HARENDRA RAM @ HARINDRA RAM SON OF NIREKHAN RAM VILLAGE- JAMALPUR, PS- MAKER, DIST- SARAN ... ... Petitioners.

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 04-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Maker P.S. Case No.38 of 2010 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 427, 395 & 452 of the Indian Penal Code, 17 of the C.L.A. Act, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3⁄4 of the Explosive Substance Act.

3. The petitioners along with 25 known and 50 unknown persons are said to have attacked on the house of the informant, exploded bomb through remote.

4. The petitioners are quite innocent and have

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50966 of 2024(2) dt.04-09-2024 2/3 been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. The allegations levelled against the petitioners is general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that so far as the merit of the case is concerned, giving such a vivid description of such a occurrence by the informant seems to be false as all the accused persons are of different villages. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioners is serious in nature, hence they do not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case as well as the fact that the petitioners moved for anticipatory bail after 14 years in spite of the fact that they are named accused, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected.

7. However, if the petitioners surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50966 of 2024(2) dt.04-09-2024 3/3 considering the fact that petitioner nos.2 and 3 are senior citizens.

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