Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37491/2016rejected

Dinesh Singh @ Dinesh Kr. Singh And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2016-11-15Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.37491 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -136 Year- 2015 Thana -JANDAHA District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Dinesh Singh @ Dinesh Kr. Singh son of Ram Pukar Singh

2. Nawal Singh son of Ram Jinish Singh Both Residents of Village Kesho Narayanpur, P.S.- Tajpur (O.P. Halai), District- Samastipur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lovekush Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 15-11-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Jandaha P.S. Case No. 136/2015, registered for the offences punishable under Section 307 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code. The informant named the petitioners along with other accused persons and alleged that Dinesh Singh firstly assaulted the informant with iron rod on his head as well as his grandfather and Nawal Singh snatched money from the pocket of the informant and assaulted the informant with iron rod on his head. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the doctor found only one injury on the head of the informant, whereas two persons are alleged to have assaulted the informant

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37491 of 2016 (3) dt.15-11-2016 2/2 with iron rod on his head.

It appears from perusal of the case diary that the petitioners were granted anticipatory bail till the submission of charge-sheet. The police found the case true under Section 307 and submitted charge-sheet thereafter; the petitioners again filed this anticipatory bail petition, but it appears that there is specific allegation that both the petitioners assaulted the informant with iron rod on his head and the injury found on the head is grievous in nature.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Vinita/- U T