Kangresh Saw @ Congres Saw v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.52840 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -178 Year- 2014 Thana -DULHIN BAZAR District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Kangresh Saw @ Congres Saw son of Ram Kewal Saw resident of Rakasia, P.S. Dulhin Bazar, District - Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 04-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner apprehends arrest in Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 178 of 2014 instituted for the offence under Section-302 & other minor Sections of the Indian Penal Code.

It is alleged in the written report that the informant received information that this petitioner with other accused persons was assaulting the son of the informant with Lathi, Danda and other weapons. The informant went to the place of occurrence and saw the petitioner and other accused persons brutally assaulting her son causing his death and thereafter, they fled away.

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the deceased was a man of criminal antecedent. It has further been submitted that witnesses have stated before police that the victim (deceased) attempted to assault the petitioner with knife.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.52840 of 2017 (3) dt.04-12-2017 2/2 The case diary has been received.

The learned APP has submitted that in the postmortem report, the doctor has found multiple bruises of various sizes, a depressed fracture over left parietal region of scalp and cause of death was due to aforesaid injuries caused by hard and blunt substance. It has further been submitted that the informant and other witnesses have also supported the case in various paragraphs of the case diary. In such circumstances, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.

The petitioner is directed to surrender in the court below and seek regular bail which will be considered and disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. (Sanjay Priya, J) A.K.V./- U T