Sunil Chaudhary @ Sunil Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67996 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2024 Thana- NOKHA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Sunil Chaudhary @ Sunil Kumar Singh S/O Late Raghunath Chaudhary Resident of Village- Ram Nagar, Police Station- Nokha, District- Rohtas at Sasaram.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 17-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Nokha P.S. Case No. 123 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 354B, 379, 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. All the F.I.R. named accused persons including this petitioner in furtherance of their common intention armed with deadly weapons are said to have assaulted the informant and his family members with intention to kill them due to which they sustained injuries on vital part also. The petitioner is said to have assaulted one Rohit Kumar on his head.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67996 of 2024(2) dt.17-10-2024 2/2 such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that informant and co-accused, Ashok Sah are own brothers and there is land dispute between them. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that there is direct allegation against this petitioner to assault Rohit Kumar on his head with an intention to kill him. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

7. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

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