Patna High CourtCR. MISC./75610/2018dismissed

Binod Sah @ Binod Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2019-03-13Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75610 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-158 Year-2018 Thana- CHAPRA TOWN District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Binod Sah @ Binod Kumar 2.

Bhurendra Sah @ Dhurendra Prasad @ Durandra Prasad @ Dhurendra Sah @ Dhurandhar Prasad 3.

Raghunandan Sah @ Raghunandan Singh @ Raghunandan Prasad All are sons of Late Ramlalan Sah,all Resident of Village-Mauna Masjhid,Katahari Bagh,P.S. Chapra Town,Distt.-Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jai Kishore Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 13-03-2019 Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioner no. s already been arrested and seeks permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail petition as against him, as the same has become infructuous.

2. Permission is accorded. Anticipatory bail petition as against petitioner no. 2 is permitted to be withdrawn and is dismissed as such.

3. The petitioner nos. 1 and 3 apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 302/34 IPC registered in connection with Chapra Town P.S. Case No. 158/2018.

4. It is submitted that the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 have been falsely implicated and thrust of accusation of tying gamcha around the neck and dragging the father of the informant is on co-accused on Manoj Kumar and Birendra Kumar Sah, but the accusation of assault with iron rod upon the deceased is general and omnibus against petitioner nos. 1 and 3 along with other

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75610 of 2018(3) dt.13-03-2019 2/2 co-accused persons. The petitioner nos. 1 and 3 claim clean antecedents.

5. Learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail petition on the basis of para 6 of the case diary, according to which other accused persons including the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 have assaulted the deceased with iron rod.

6. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner nos. 1 and 3. Bail petition stands dismissed.

(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/- U T