Bench considered petitioners prayer for anticipatory bail in a murder and attempt to kill case involving criminal antecedents, holding strict eligibility requirements apply under proviso to Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Rejects prayer for anticipatory bail as petitioners have criminal antecedents and are actively involved in serious criminal activity.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.10516 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -100 Year- 2015 Thana -MAJHAULIA DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH)
====================================================== 1. Mukhi Sahani 2. Asheshar Sahani, Both sons of Late Dharman Sahni, Resident of villageDhab Tola, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Majhauliya P.S. case No. 100 of 2015 under Section 302, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The informant alleged that petitioners and others have threatened his son, Manoj Mishra, to kill. The accused persons, including the petitioners, also made an attempt to kill his son for which Paharpur P.S. case No. 114 of 2014 was registered. On the date of occurrence, Dinesh Lal Srivastava took the son of informant for Panchayati but he did not return and his dead body was found.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that save and except suspicion, there is no material against the petitioners. The deceased himself was a veteran criminal. The
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10516 of 2016 (3) dt.08-03-2017
2/2
petitioners have falsely been implicated in Paharpur P.S. case No. 114 of 2014. Similarly situated accused Anil Sahni and Allaudin Mian have already been granted anticipatory bail by this court vide order dated 21.09.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No 25192 of 2015 but on perusal of the records, I find that the informant and other witnesses have stated that petitioners were running after Manoj Mishra, the deceased. The petitioners earlier made attempt to kill Manoj Mishra for which Paharpur P.S. case No. 114 of 2014 was registered against the petitioners and others. It appears that petitioners have got criminal antecedent and from paragraph 3 of the petition it appears that a dozen cases are pending against the petitioners under different Sections of the IPC, including Section 302, 395 and other Sections of the IPC and Arms Act. The proviso of Section 438 of the Cr. P. C. says that a person having criminal antecedent should not be granted anticipatory bail.
Having considered the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)
BKS/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioners who are alleged to have criminal antecedents and a pending attempt-to-kill charge?
Whether proviso of Section 438 Cr.P.C. bars early release when applicant has prior criminal history?
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Mukhi Sahani
Asheshar Sahani
The State of Bihar
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
