Patna High CourtCR. MISC./51063/2019dismissed

Dinesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2019-08-19Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51063 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-408 Year-2019 Thana- LAKHISARAI DistrictLakhisarai ====================================================== DINESH SINGH, male, aged about 45 years, Son of Late Prasidh Singh Resident of Village-Sawandih, Police Station-Lakhisarai, DistrictLakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Raju, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party:

APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 19-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 324, 337, 338, 354, 354(B), 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 408 of 2019.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and the specific accusation of assault is attributed to co-accused Dilip Singh who is said to have broken the head and hand of the daughter of the informant. It is submitted that no specific overt act whatsoever has been alleged against the petitioner, who claims clean antecedents.

4. Learned APP assisted by learned counsel for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51063 of 2019(2) dt.19-08-2019 2/2 informant appears and has been heard. It is submitted on behalf of the informant that the petitioner is specifically alleged to have torn the blouze of the informant's wife and thereby committed the offence under Section 354(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations, gravity of the offence alleged as well as the incorrect submission made by the petitioner with regard to absence of overt act having been alleged against him, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar/BT U T