Patna High CourtCR. MISC./61705/2022rejected

Sannu Kumar @ Sannu Sharma @ Chugna v. The State Of Bihar

2023-04-11Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61705 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2022 Thana- BARABAR TOURIST DistrictJehanabad ====================================================== 1.

SANNU KUMAR @ SANNU SHARMA @ CHUGNA Son of Nand Kishor Sharma @ Nand Kishor Singh Resident of Village- Gamharpur, P.S.- Khizersarai, District- Gaya 2.

AMIT KUMAR @ AMIT @ GANESH Son Ramanuj Sharma Resident of Village- Gamharpur, P.S.- Khizersarai, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 11-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Barabar Prayatan (Vishnuganj) P.S. Case No. 104 of 2022 registered for the offences under Sections 307 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant case. Further submission is that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61705 of 2022(2) dt.11-04-2023 2/2 the State vehemently opposes the prayer of bail and submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioners of assaulting the informant on his head due to which he sustained lacerated wound on his head. He therefore, submits that petitioners does not deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioners and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Their prayer for bail is accordingly rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) anuradha/- U T