Patna High CourtCR. MISC./59757/2018partly allowed disposal

Dharmendra Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2018-12-14Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.59757 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2018 Thana- EKMA District- Saran ======================================================

1. Dharmendra Singh

2. Dharmveer Singh

3. Shatrudhan Singh @ Shatrudhan Suingh @ Shatrohan Singh

4. Ranjeet Singh All sons of Hansraj Singh @ Hansnath Singh

5. Sonu Singh @ Rahul Kumar @ Sonu Kumar son of Chandrabhan Singh all resident of Village- Bhuili, P.S. Ekma, District- Saran. ... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Neeraj Kumar Alias Sanidh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 14-12-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Ekma P.S. Case No. 98 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 354, 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accusation against the petitioners no. 1, 2 and 5 is that they assaulted the informant and others and so far as petitioners no. 3 and 4 are concerned, although, they are named in the first information report but no specific overt-act has been attributed against them. In the alleged occurrence, altogether four persons sustained injury and one of the injureds sustained

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.59757 of 2018(4) dt.14-12-2018 2/3 grievous injury.

No doubt, there is counter case also and allegedly, two persons from the side of petitioners, too, sustained injury but considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, in my view, petitioner no. 1, namely, Dharmendra Singh, petitioner no. 2, namely, Dharmveer Singh and petitioner no. 5, namely, Sonu Singh @ Rahul Kumar @ Sonu Kumar do not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. So far as prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner no. 3, namely, Shatrudhan Singh @ Shatrudhan Suingh @ Shatrohan Singh and petitioner no. 4, namely, Ranjeet Singh are concerned, it is informed that having more or less similar allegation, co-accused Hansnath Singh @ Hansraj Singh and one other have already been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 20.07.

2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 43048 of 2018. In view of the aforesaid discussions, it is ordered that petitioner no. 3, namely, Shatrudhan Singh @ Shatrudhan Suingh @ Shatrohan Singh and petitioner no.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.59757 of 2018(4) dt.14-12-2018 3/3 (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st, Saran in Ekma P.S. Case No. 98 of 2018, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. So far as remaining petitioners are concerned, their prayer for anticipatory bail stand rejected. However, it is made clear that no prejudice shall cause to the competent court at the time of consideration of regular bail application of above stated petitioners.

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) shahzad/- U T