← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./70804/2019bail rejected

Mukesh Singh Bhokta v. The State Of Bihar

2020-03-05Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70804 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2019 Thana- DUMARIYA District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Mukesh Singh Bhokta Son of Raj Kumar Singh Bhokta Resident of Village - Kokana, P.S.- Dumariya, Distt - Gaya.

2.

Shambhu Singh Bhokta Son of Ramvilash Singh Bhokta. Resident of Village - Kokana, P.S.- Dumariya, Distt - Gaya.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Binod Murari Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Choubey Jawahar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 05-03-2020 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned APP for the State.

Petitioners apprehend arrest in Dumariya PS Case No. 7 of 2019 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 504, 452, 436 IPC, Section 3⁄4 of the Explosive Substance Act and Sections 16,18,20,23 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. The FIR has been lodged against 50 - 60 unknown Nuxals. The informant has alleged that they have put a parcha and damaged house of the informant by explosives.

Counsel for the petitioners submits that no one has identified the petitioners and merely because their names has been taken by co-accused Tuntun Singh Bhokta, who is the prime accused, that they have been implicated in this case.

Learned APP has opposed the prayer. It is submitted that the petitioners and other co-accused were members of the mob who have committed the offence. They are members of the extremist outfit and co-accused Girija Paswan has been allowed regular bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70804 of 2019(3) dt.05-03-2020 2/2 Considering the aforesaid submissions this Court is not inclined to allow the petitioners the benefit of anticipatory bail. If the petitioners surrender before the court below they would be at liberty to raise these issues which may be considered while considering regular bail application.

This application is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U T