Pampu Singh @ Dharmendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52512 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-213 Year-2021 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya ====================================================== Pampu Singh @ Dharmendra Kumar, Son of Ram Naresh Singh, Resident of Vill- Rejapur, P.S.- Bodh Gaya, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Md. Ataur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-08-2024

1. Heard Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Md. Ataur Rahman, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bodh Gaya P.S. Case No. 213 of 2021 dated 03.07.2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 379, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution story, the informant alleged that this petitioner along with 4-5 unknown persons abused and assaulted him and one person, namely, Alok. It is further alleged that these miscreants were having danda and knives in their hands and they snatched a mobile phone and Rs. 20,000/- in cash from them. It is further alleged that this petitioner assaulted the informant by a sharp edged weapon on his right forearm.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52512 of 2024(2) dt.22-08-2024 2/2 though against the petitioner, there is criminal antecedent of three cases but he is on bail in all the said cases, in fact the alleged occurrence as described in the FIR did not take place and the FIR was registered after the delay of one day without giving any explanation and the petitioner is co-villager of the informant, in between them, a dispute was already existing when the alleged occurrence is said to have taken place and there is a case and counter case in between both the parties.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Having considered the nature of allegation appearing against this petitioner who is alleged to have inflicted a blow at the right forearm of the informant by means of a sharp edged weapon and other allegation is that he and his companions were in drunken condition when they started abusing the members of the prosecution party and further, the petitioner has criminal antecedent of three cases as reflects from the order impugned, in my opinion, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner stands rejected.

(Shailendra Singh, J) annu/- U T