Sanjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69477 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-729 Year-2015 Thana- SASARAM MUFFSIL District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

Sanjay Kumar S/o- Bijay Bahadur Ram Residents of village- Bararhi PSSasaram, Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram 2.

Bijay Bahadur Ram son of Mejar Ram @ Nejar Ram Residents of villageBararhi PS- Sasaram, Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram 3.

Anil Kumar Son of Mejar Ram @ Nejar Ram Residents of village- Bararhi PS- Sasaram, Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram 4.

Sunil Kumar Son of Mejar Ram @ Nejar Ram Residents of village- Bararhi PS- Sasaram, Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jai Prakash Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr. Ajeet Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 17-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 504, 506, 509, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Petitioners along with other accused persons are said to have assaulted the informant and his family member.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that there is general and omnibus allegation levelled against the petitioners. He submits that there

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69477 of 2024(2) dt.17-10-2024 2/2 is no specific overt act against the petitioners. He submits that after investigation the police has already submitted the chargesheet against the petitioners in 2023. He further submits that petitioners have no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail application.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the FIR is of the year 2015 but this anticipatory application has been filed before this Court in 2024 and there is no explanation regarding such delay in filing the present case before this Court.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected in connection with Sasaram (M) P.S. Case No. 729 of 2015. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T