Patna High CourtCR. MISC./49516/2017rejected

Gautam Kumar Choudhary @ Gautam Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2017-10-18Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.49516 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2017 Thana- MAHESI District- Saharsa ====================================================== Gautam Kumar Choudhary @ Gautam Kumar son of Gopal Choudhary @ Raj Kishor Chaudhary, resident of Village- Mahishi, P.S.- Mahishi, DistrictSaharsa. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pawan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. SRI TARKESHWAR NATH THAKUR ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 18-10-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mahishi P. S. Case No. 99 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 379, 384, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, the petitioner and other two co-accused being in drunken condition stopped the tractor of the informant and demanded Rs. 5,00/- per trip ransom and due to refusal they attacked on the informant and his tractor and co-accused Kundan Kumar snatched Rs. 1500/- from the pocket and the petitioner damaged the glass of the vehicle and other snatched silver chain. Dilip Paswan and Harishankar Singh intervened into the matter and saved the informant and then the three miscreants fled away towards north after causing threats.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49516 of 2017(2) dt.18-10-2017 2/2 Submission is of false implication and that the informant has dashed the boy with the tractor, resulting some altercation and he has lodged the false case. The prosecution story appears not probable and reliable and the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

Learned APP opposes the prayer of pre-arrest bail. In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T