Lappo Pandey @ Larfu Pandey @ Sanjeev @ Sanjeev Kumar Pandey @ Sanjeev Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84309 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-534 Year-2023 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka ====================================================== 1.

Lappo Pandey @ Larfu Pandey @ Sanjeev @ Sanjeev Kumar Pandey @ Sanjeev Pandey Son Of Nandkishor Pandey @ Nand Kishor Prasad Pande Resident Of Village - Kanjhiya, Police Station - Amarpur, District - Banka 2.

Kailash Kahar @ Kailu Kahar Son Of Siwan Kahar Resident Of Village - Kanjhiya, Police Station - Amarpur, District - Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Mukherjee For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anita Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 07-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 534 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections-341, 323, 504, 506, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per FIR, allegation against the petitioners is that on 24-07-2023, the petitioners and two others caused hurt on the head of informant by means of iron rod and in the meanwhile, the petitioner No. 2 is said to have snatched away Rs. 3,10,000/- from the informant.

4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84309 of 2023(4) dt.07-03-2024 2/2 that they are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. The offshoot of the dispute is irrigation of field which caused hot talk between the parties and ultimately, the alleged occurrence is said to have taken place.

5. On the other hand, Shri J. N. Thakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the endorsement of the injury report of the injured is at paragraph-17 of the case diary, which shows that he suffered altogether three injuries and out of those injuries, the injury No. 1 is grievous in nature.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail and accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.

7. However, if the petitioners surrender in the court below and seek regular bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) A.K.V.//- U T