Sri Bhagwan Bind And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.11941 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1446 Year- 2015 Thana -SASARAM NAGAR District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================
1. Sri Bhagwan Bind, son of Chhangur Bind
2. Vinda Devi @ Binda Devi, wife of Sri Bhagwan Bind 3.Vikash Bind, son of Sri Bhagwan Bind All residents of Songawan, P.S. - Darigaon, District - Rohtas. .... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Ajay Nandan Sahay, Advocate For the Opposite Party : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 24-08-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. It is stated that the petitioner no. 3 namely, Vikash Bind has already been arrested and as such his anticipatory bail application has become infructuous.
3. As prayed, the anticipatory bail application as against petitioner no. 3 is permitted to be withdrawn and is dismissed as such.
4. The petitioner nos. 1 and 2 apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Sasaram (Darigaon) P.S. Case No. 1446 of 2015.
5. It is submitted that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 have been falsely implicated as the accusations are general and omnibus against all the accused persons.
6. Learned APP assisted by learned counsel for the informant oppose the anticipatory bail petition referring to the case diary, para 35 whereof discloses that the injury to the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11941 of 2016 (9) dt.24-08-2016 informant's wife is grievous and poses danger to her life. The injury report of the informant as appearing in para 29 of the case diary also discloses injury on the face of the informant. Para 4 of the case diary in which the restatement of the informant is recorded discloses specific accusation against the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 of having assaulted the informant and his wife respectively.
7. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of the offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner nos. 1 and 2. The bail petition stands dismissed.
(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/BT U T