Bhim Singh And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.3516 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -46 Year- 2006 Thana -NAWADAH COMPLAINT CASE DistrictNAWADA ======================================================

1. Bhim Singh, S/o Late Mathura Singh,

2. Nakul Singh, S/o Late Mathura Singh, Both resident of Village- Mai, P.S.- Warisaliganj, District- Nawada.

3. Baudhu Singh, S/o Late Shibu Singh, Both resident of Village- Belda, P.S.- Warisaliganj, District- Nawada.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Tanik Singh, S/o Late Rameshwa Singh, resident of Village- Belda, P.S.- Warisaliganj, District- Nawada.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Parmanand Pd. Nr. Sahi For the Opposite Party/s : Sri Gauri Shankar Gupta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 46 of 2009 registered for an offence under section 365 of the Indian Penal Code. In cause title the Complaint Case No. 46 of 2009 has been wrongly printed as Case No. 46 of 2006. The same is hereby ordered to be corrected as Complaint Case No. 46 of 2009.

It appears that a police case bearing Warsaliganj Police Station Case No. 18 of 2006 was registered against these petitioners in which they were granted bail, vide B.P. No. 530 and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3516 of 2018 (3) dt.02-02-2018 2/2 339 of 2006, by the learned Sessions Judge, Nawada on 18.07.2006 and 03.05.2006 respectively. After investigation, Police finding no proof against these petitioners, submitted Final Form and the final report was accepted by the learned court below. Subsequently, a protest petition was filed and after cognizance, warrant of arrest has been issued against these petitioners. The petitioners were on bail and so they are required to appear before the court below and pray for regular bail.

In view of above facts, this anticipatory bail application is not maintainable. The petitioners are directed to surrender before the court below within six weeks and pray for regular bail where their prayer shall be considered keeping in mind that earlier they were on bail.

This application with the above observation is disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar, J) Mahesh/- U T