Arun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53887 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-146 Year-2024 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West Champaran ====================================================== Arun Kumar son of Mahavir Patel Village- Baswariya Pipal Chowk PsBettiah Town Dist- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-08-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bettiah Town PS Case No. 146 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of three cases and the informant alleges that on 24.03.2024, in the night at 11:00 pm while informant was standing roundabout when petitioner came and started abusing on which the informant objected when petitioner assaulted him by knife causing injury on left shoulder.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53887 of 2024(2) dt.29-08-2024 2/3 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is also submitted that the date of occurrence is 24.03.2024 and the FIR came to be instituted on 29.03.2024, which caste an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that mother of the informant in a liquor case was sent to judicial custody and the informant suspected that his house was raided by police based on the information provided by the petitioner, thus, implicated him in connivance with his mother without imputing any motive for the occurrence, which perhaps explains why the FIR was instituted after a delay of five days.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that motive may not have been recorded in the FIR but then from perusal of the order impugned, it would manifest that the same records that the injury was caused on the left shoulder of the informant by a sharp weapon and the informant also alleges that he was assaulted by knife.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53887 of 2024(2) dt.29-08-2024 3/3 application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J.) Sudhanshu/- U T