Kamlesh Sah @ Kamlesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59035 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2020 Thana- MAJORGANJ District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Kamlesh Sah @ Kamlesh Kumar S/o Rajaram Sah R/o Village - Bahera, P.S. - Mejarganj, District - Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amrendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 06-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mejarganj P.S. Case No.131 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner and co-accused, Rakesh Sah are said to have assaulted the nephew of the informant by means of iron rod causing injury to him and he fell down. The petitioner is also said to have assaulted Vishesh Mahto causing injury on his head. It is also alleged that Kamlesh Sah, the petitioner snatched the Mangalsutra made of gold from the wife of the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59035 of 2021(3) dt.06-07-2022 2/2 present case. There is case and counter case between the parties. It is further submitted that firstly the petitioner has filed an FIR against the informant and thereafter the informant has filed the present case against the petitioner and others. It is submitted that there is land dispute between the parties and both sides are covillagers. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail application.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that the injuries sustained by the injured person are grievous in nature. Taking into consideration the fact that injuries are grievous in nature, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.) Sanjay/- U T