Avinash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71985 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2021 Thana- MADANPUR District- Aurangabad ====================================================== AVINASH KUMAR S/o Ram Jivan Mehta @ Ramjivan Mahto R/o VillagePiproura, Tola- Arjunbgha, P.S.- Madanpur, Distt- Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 29-04-2023 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Madanpur P.S. Case No. 187 of 2021 for the offence registered under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 379, 354, 324, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation is regarding the petitioner having inflicted iron rod blow on the father of the informant resulting in him sustaining grievous injuries.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is having a clean antecedent. The learned counsel

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71985 of 2022(2) dt.29-04-2023 2/2 for the petitioner has further submitted that the parties are agnates and the dispute in question has taken place on account of plucking of guava by the petitioner from the tree of the informant.

Per contra, the learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the materials available on record, this Court finds that the petitioner has inflicted iron rod blow on the father of the informant resulting in him sustaining grievous injuries, hence I do not find the present case to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail, thus the present petition stands dismissed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/SonalU T