Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1708/2024bail rejected

Ravindra Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

2024-02-13Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1708 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-388 Year-2023 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui ====================================================== Ravindra Thakur Son Of Late Gajo Thakur Resident Of Village - Indpe, P.S. - Jamui, District - Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Prasad Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 388 of 2023 dated 23.06.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354B, 307, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, when the informant's wife went to attend call of nature then the co-accused, Sandip Thakur caught hold of the informant's wife and started to molest her. Thereafter, the informant's wife raised alarm and after hearing alarm, the informant went there and saw that the co-accused, Sandip Thakur was fleeing away from the place

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1708 of 2024(2) dt.13-02-2024 2/3 of occurrence. The informant chased the co-accused, Sandip Thakur but, in the meantime, the petitioner and the co-accused persons caught hold of the informant and by putting towel around his neck started to drag and strangulate him. The petitioner assaulted on the informant's head with iron rod due to which he sustained injury on his head. It is further alleged that the co-accused, Sandip Thakur assaulted the informant's wife on her head causing head injury.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence. Learned counsel has further submitted that no one has seen the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that the specific allegation is against the petitioner who tried to strangulate the informant and later on, he assaulted on the head of the informant with iron rod due to which, he sustained head injury. As per the injury report of the injured as stated in para 7 of the impugned order, the injured sustained one hair

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1708 of 2024(2) dt.13-02-2024 3/3 line fracture on frontal region of his head which has been opined as grievous in nature.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the grievous injury and the specific allegation against the petitioner, I am of the view that no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. The petition is rejected and the petitioner is directed to surrender to the Court below within four weeks from the date of this order and the Court below will consider the prayer of bail of the petitioner without being prejudiced by this order.

7. The application stands rejected.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T