Patna High CourtCR. MISC./52907/2018rejected

Guddu Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2018-10-25Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.52907 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -15 Year- 2018 Thana -UPHARA District- AURANGABAD ======================================================

1. Guddu Singh,

2. Lalu Kumar @ Lalu Singh,

3. Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Kumar Singh, All are sons of Surendra Singh, Resident of Village- Gorkatti, Police Station- Uphara, DistrictAurangabad. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No-2, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP For the Informant : Mr. Niranjan Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Uphara P.S. Case No.15 of 2018, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341/323/307 /379 / 504 / 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioner Lalu Kumar @ Lalu Singh allegedly caused injury with farsa at the head of the father of the informant whereas other petitioners Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Kumar Singh and Guddu Singh caused injury at the head of the informant. The doctor has found head injury on all the injured.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.52907 of 2018 (3) dt.25-10-2018 P2/ Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner Lalu Kumar @ Lalu Singh. The prayer is allowed.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is case and counter case. The land dispute is reason behind the occurrence. Petitioner side has also sustained injury, the doctor has found simple injury.

Considering the facts that the petitioners had knowledge that their act might cause death, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner Nos.1 and 3. Hence, their prayer for anticipatory bail is refused. However, in the event of surrender of the petitioners, the prayer for regular bail shall be disposed of without being prejudiced by the order of this Court. (Birendra Kumar, J) Mkr./- U T