Ramdeo Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9761 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -100 Year- 2017 Thana -PAKRIDAYAL DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================

1. RAMDEO SINGH, s/o late Ram Awatar Singh,

2. Mukesh Kumar Singh @ Mukesh Singh, s/o Shri Narayan Singh,

3. Niraj Kumar Singh @ Niraj Singh, s/o Krishnandan Singh,

4. Rakesh Kumar Singh @ Rakesh Singh, s/o Krishnandan Singh, all resident of village- Dhanougi, P.S.- Pakridayal, Dist- East Champaran, Motihari.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APP Mr. Ansul, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 3/ 21-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in Pakridayal P.S. Case No.100 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 307 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.

Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that other accused have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 11.01.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No.582 of 2018.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9761 of 2018 (3) dt.21-02-2018 2/2 Counsel for the informant has appeared and filed Counter Affidavit, wherein, he has stated that, now, process under Section 82 Cr. P.C. has been issued against the petitioners on 12.02.2018 and proclamation has also been pasted on the house of the petitioners on 13.02.2018.

In such circumstances, this Court does not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail since proclamation has already been issued against the petitioners.

Prayer of the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.

Petitioners are, however, directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and make prayer for regular bail, which shall be considered and disposed off in accordance with law preferably on the same day after taking into consideration the fact that other co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail in this case.

(Sanjay Priya, J) JA/- U T