Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1546/2015dismissed

Dharmendra Kumar Nirala v. The State Of Bihar

2015-01-14Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1546 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -222 Year- 2014 Thana -ATRI District- GAYA ====================================================== Dharmendra Kumar Nirala, Son of Sri Shiv Nandan Prasad, Resident of Village - Salempur, Police Station - Muffasil in the District of Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 14-01-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Atari P.S. Case No. 222 of 2014, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 325, 353, 307 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code.

The Block Programme Officer, Atari, Gaya made allegation that the petitioner entered into his official chamber and after abusing him, assaulted him and caused injury in the left hand finger.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed many Complaint Petitions which is annexed as Annexure-2 on 3rd December, 2014 and 06th December, 2014 alleging therein that the informant demanded illegal gratification

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1546 of 2015 (2) dt.14-01-2015 for execution of the work and that's why the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case.

Of course, the petitioner filed petition but from the perusal of the fardbeyan, it appears that the Block Programme Officer has made very specific allegation that the petitioner entered into his office abused and assaulted him and caused injury in his hand. The injury is simple in nature.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

However, the petitioner, if so advised, may surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail and his prayer shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order and considering the facts that the informant has got simple injury.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) KKSINHA/- U T