← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./65357/2022bail rejected

Anil Das @ Anil Kumar Das v. The State Of Bihar

2023-05-05Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65357 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2022 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Anil Das @ Anil Kumar Das Son Of Jageshwar Das R/O Village- Gangoliya Bahilwara, P.S.- Saraiya, Distt.- Muzzafarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate Ms.Priyanka Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dinesh Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-05-2023 Heard both parties.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Saraiya P.S. Case No. 265 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code. Later on, section 302 IPC was also added. As per the prosecution case, this petitioner pierced screw driver near the eye of son of informant (deceased) who died during course of treatment.

It is submitted that though there is allegation of piercing but no corresponding injury has been found by the doctor. FIR has been lodged after delay of twelve days without any plausible explanation. Similarly situated co-accused Umesh Das has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65357 of 2022(3) dt.05-05-2023 2/2 20.01.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 54510 of 2022. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

Counsel for informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is specific accusation of piercing screw driver in the eye of deceased and the deceased has also named this petitioner in his dying declaration. Considering the facts aforesaid and gravity of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T