Arman Miyan @ Araman Miyan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59160 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-624 Year-2023 Thana- BHORE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Arman Miyan @ Araman Miyan S/O Nizam Miyan R/O Village- Rakba, Raqba, P.S- Bhore, District- Gopalganj, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Indrajeet Bhushan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Harendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-10-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bhore P.S. Case No. 624/2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 307, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of seven cases and the informant alleges that petitioner assaulted him by Daab causing injury on head.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant on account of an altercation, which had taken place as the petitioner and his side had refused to pay the extortion

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59160 of 2024(3) dt.26-10-2024 2/2 demanded by the informant.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail and submits that from perusal of the injury report it would manifest that the opinion with regard to the injury has been reserved and the injury inflicted by the petitioner on the informant by Daab is on head, which is vital part of the body. It is also submitted that since the doctors have reserved the opinion with regard to the injury that amply demonstrates that the injury is not simple.

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. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T