Patna High CourtCR. MISC./69646/2018dismissed

Meghan Mochi And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2019-01-15Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.69646 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-300 Year-2016 Thana- GAURICHAK DistrictPatna ======================================================

1. Meghan Mochi Son of Shanichar Mochi

2. Mithlesh Mochi @ Mithilesh Das Son of Meghan Mochi

3. Sukhu Mochi, Son of Meghan Mochi.

4. Mukesh Mochi, Son of Mithilesh Mochi @ Mithilesh Das

5. Amarjeet Mochi, Son of Meghan Mochi.

6. Ranjit Mochi @ Genchu, Son of Meghan, Mochi.

7. Golu Mochi, Son of Meghan Mochi.

All Resident of Village-Shekhpura, P.S.-Gaurichak, District-Patna. ... ... Petitioners

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Respondent ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners :

Mr. Harish Kumar, Advocate.

For the Respondent :

Mr. R.P. Nat, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 15-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 300 of 2016.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated and the accusations of assault are general and omnibus in nature. It is submitted that one of the accused persons Sanjit Mochi has since been tried and acquitted by judgment dated 26.03.2018 in Sessions Trial No. 637 of 2017 by

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.69646 of 2018(3) dt.15-01-2019 2/2 the 7th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Patna City, Patna.

4. Having regard to the nature of accusations, gravity of the offence and the criminal antecedents of the petitioners in which they are accused of an offence of similar nature, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed. The petitioners shall be at liberty to move for regular bail before the Court below in which event the same shall be considered and decided on its own merit.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar/ U T