Mukesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 28837 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -181 Year- 2015 Thana -KISHANGANJ District- KISHANGANJ =========================================================== Mukesh Kumar Son of Sita Ram Paswan, Resident of Near Saint Child School Ruidhasa, Police Station- Kishanganj, District- Kishanganj. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Dilip Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :
Ms. Rita Verma, A.P.P.
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 10-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in Kishanganj P.S. Case No. 181 of 2015 dated 24.05.2015 instituted under Sections 341/323/324/325/307/379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation against the petitioner and three others is of being party to stopping the informant and assault, though the specific overt act is alleged against other co-accused.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no specific overt act alleged against the petitioner and that he has clean antecedent. It was further submitted that the informant has also later on affirmed an affidavit saying that the petitioner was not involved in the incident and wrongly his name had been
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28837 of 2017 dt.10-08-2017 2/2 mentioned in the fardbeyan.
5. Learned A.P.P. submitted that this is a case of blatant highhandedness where the petitioner, along with three others, tried to take revenge from the informant on the basis of sheer force of strength and such incidents are now becoming common every day and thus, should not be condoned.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T