Slok Kumar @ Slok Saini v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62202 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2022 Thana- KANKARBAG District- Patna ====================================================== SLOK KUMAR @ SLOK SAINI SON OF JITENDRA KUMAR SUMAN R/O NEW KARBIGAHIYA, P.S.- JAKKANPUR, DISTRICT- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dr. Satyendra Kumar Srivastava For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 12-01-2023 Heard the parties.

The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection with Kankarbagh P.S. Case No.106 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable under sections 307, 326, 354, 323, 504, 506, 34 of the IPC and section 27 of Arms Act.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith other accused persons entered the tea shop of the informant and also assaulted and abused his wife. It is alleged that when the informant intervened in the matter the accused persons left the shop and after sometime, they again came upon motorcycle and on co-accused fired upon the informant which caused grievous injury in his right chest.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. He

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62202 of 2022(2) dt.12-01-2023 2/2 has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He further submits that the petitioner has been made accused in the present case only on the basis of statement of co-accused Sudhanshu Raj. He further submits that the specific allegation is against co-accused Lucky Saini to fire upon the injured person. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail by submitting that the petitioner is also involved in the present case.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T