Satyendra Prasad @ Satyendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66350 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-138 Year-2022 Thana- DHANARUA District- Patna ====================================================== SATYENDRA PRASAD @ SATYENDRA KUMAR S/o Late Umesh Prasad R/o - Devachand Bigha, P.S.- Dhanarua, Distt- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Suryakant Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey Mr. Arjun Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-03-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned APP for the State. The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection with Dhanarua P.S. Case No.138 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, om 16.03.2022, the informant was informed that his father is lying dead in mud on road situated in South-Western side of village Makdumpur. When the body of father of informant was washed, several injuries was found on his body. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is involved in the murder of the informant's father.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66350 of 2022(4) dt.13-03-2023 2/3 petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. He 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 there is no specific overt act against the petitioner. A title suit is pending between the father of the informant and co-accused Pappu Kumar. He further submits that in the entire case diary there is no evidence available against the petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner has been made accused in the FIR and later on during the course of investigation, it was found on the basis of call details that the petitioner was also present on the place of occurrence at the time of incident.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as considering the nature of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66350 of 2022(4) dt.13-03-2023 3/3 court below within a period of six weeks from today and seek for regular bail, the learned court below shall pass the order, preferably on the same day in accordance with law. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T