Dharmendra Sah @ Dharmendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67483 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2024 Thana- RASULPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Dharmendra Sah @ Dharmendra Kumar Son of Late Shri Kishun Sah @ Late Krishna Sah R/o Village- Charwa, P.S.- Rasulpur, District- Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-12-2024 Heard the parties.

2.

Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Rasulpur P.S. Case No.57 of 2024, registered for the offence punishable u/s 341, 323, 307, 325, 504, 506, 34 of IPC.

3.

As per prosecution case, the petitioner along with other co-accused persons have assaulted the informant and his family members with knife, rod and lathi. It is further alleged that the petitioner snatched golden chain from the neck of the son of the informant.

4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. The real fact is that the informant took loan of Rs.2,00,000/- from the petitioner and when he demanded his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67483 of 2024(3) dt.13-12-2024 2/2 rupees from the informant then he along with his whole family members assaulted him and when family member of the petitioner tried to pacify the matter, they started fighting and both sides received injury. Date of occurrence as mentioned in FIR is 26.03.2024 but FIR was lodged on 08.04.2024. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para 3 of the bail application and has been languishing in custody since 27.07.2024.

5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of regular bail on his behalf is hereby rejected.

7.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

8.

However, petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for regular bail after framing of charge.

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