Surendra Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57990 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-448 Year-2019 Thana- SAUR BAZAR District- Saharsa ====================================================== 1.

SURENDRA SHARMA Son of Late Kalamdhari Sharma Resident of Village - Forsaha Ward no.16, P.s.- Sour Bazar, Distt.- Saharsa. 2.

Kishor Sharma Son of Late Hulan Sharma Resident of Village - Forsaha Ward no.16, P.s.- Sour Bazar, Distt.- Saharsa. 3.

Budhiyar Sharma Son of Late Rudal Sharma Resident of Village - Forsaha Ward no.16, P.s.- Sour Bazar, Distt.- Saharsa. 4.

Jitu Sharma @ Jitendra Sharma Son of Musharu Sharma Resident of Village - Forsaha Ward no.16, P.s.- Sour Bazar, Distt.- Saharsa. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Madhuri Lata, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 27-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 354, 379, 504, 326, 354A and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per FIR, the informant has alleged that her modesty was outraged in the public and beaten up by the accused persons including the petitioners. When relative of the informant came to rescue her, namely, Anil Sharma and Sumit

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57990 of 2021(2) dt.27-04-2022 2/2 Sharma they were also attacked by the accused persons due to which they sustained grievous injury by means of sharp cut weapon. She further alleged that a silver chain worth of Rs.2,000/- was also snatched by the accused persons. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioners have got clean antecedent.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

However, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail and the court below may consider their prayer for bail on the ground that no sharp cut injury has been caused on vital part of the body of the injured persons and pass appropriate order without being prejudiced by this order.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T