Patna High CourtCR. MISC./66883/2018bail rejected

Pinkesh @ Pinkesh Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2018-12-14Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.66883 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-344 Year-2018 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL DistrictBegusarai ======================================================

1. PINKESH @ PINKESH SINGH

2. Ram Pravesh Singh@ Kari Singh@ Ram Parbash Singh

3. Lali Singh

4. Teni Singh All Sons of Rambali Singh Resident of VillageLodidih, P.S. Muffasil (Singhaul), District- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Nand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 14-12-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that in view of arrest of petitioner no. 1 during pendency of the instant application, the prayer for anticipatory bail so far as petitioner no. 1 is concerned, has become infructuous.

Petitioner nos. 2,3 and 4 are apprehending their arrest in connection with Mufassil (Singhaul) P.S Case No. 344 of 2018 registered for the offenses punishable under Sections 341,323,307,379,504,506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case as due to plucking of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.66883 of 2018(2) dt.14-12-2018 2/2 mango by the children some altercation has taken place. Specific allegation of assault has been attributed to the petitioners as it appears from the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Begusarai. The same has been corroborated by the injury report referred to in paragraph 6 of the case diary. Considering the nature of allegation, this Court is not inclined to grant the petitioners anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer is rejected.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) Prakash/- U