Pankaj Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.35816 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -6 Year- 2017 Thana -TAJPUR District- SAMASTIPUR ======================================================

1. Pankaj Kumar Singh son of Arjun Singh resident of village - Madhopur Digharua, P.S. - Tajpur, District - Samastipur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aditya Prakash Sahay For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Veena Kumari Jaiswal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 21-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the State.

The petitioner apprehends arrest in Tajpur P.S. Case No. 06 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Section-302 & other minor Sections of the Indian Penal Code.

It is alleged in the written report that on the date of occurrence, while the informant along with his two brothers namely, Pramod Singh and Rambabu Singh were sitting outside their house, then this petitioner along with other accused persons came armed with weapon and started assaulting all three brothers and the petitioner along with other co-accused as named in the written report, caught the younger brother of the informant namely Pramod Singh while other coaccused namely Birendra Singh gave dagger blows to him with knife. In the instant case, the police after investigation has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35816 of 2017 (4) dt.21-09-2017 2/2 submitted charge sheet against the accused persons showing the petitioner absconder. Cognizance has also been taken against this petitioner on the basis of charge sheet for the offence under Sections302, 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The status report, as called for from the court below, has been received which has been kept at Flag "Y". From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears that this petitioner along with other accused is absconding and their case has been separated. Now the case is pending for appearance and commitment of remaining six accused persons.

Therefore, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

The petitioner is directed to surrender in the court below and seek regular bail, which will be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Sanjay Priya, J) A.K.V./- U T