Ashok Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ashok Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No bail relief granted. Withdrawal permitted for petitioner no. 3 (his portion stands dismissed as withdrawn); prayer for anticipatory bail rejected for petitioner nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5.

Issue for consideration

Whether the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5, apprehending arrest in PS Case No. 75 of 2023 (Nadi P.S., Patna) registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120B, 395, 307, 436, 427 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, should be granted.

Court's answer

Considering the nature of accusation, criminal antecedent, and the fact that the bail petitions of two co-accused (Chandan Kumar and Rajiv Kumar) have already been rejected, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners (petitioner nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5) is rejected.

Ratio / Principle

Permission granted for withdrawal of the anticipatory bail petition so far as petitioner no. 3 (Shesnath Gope) is concerned, since he was arrested during pendency; the petition in respect of petitioner no. 3 stands dismissed as withdrawn.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J.), oral order dated 10-01-2025 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 29092 of 2024, arising out of PS Case No. 75 of 2023, Nadi P.S., District Patna, in which prosecution alleges that F.I.R.-named accused including the petitioners pelted stones, fired upon a police party and burnt police vehicles parked outside a godown, registering offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120B, 395, 307, 436, 427 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act: petitioner no. 3 (Shesnath Gope), having been arrested during pendency, was permitted to withdraw his portion of the anticipatory bail petition, which stands dismissed as withdrawn; the Court, considering the nature of accusation, criminal antecedent (stated for petitioner nos. 1, 4 and 5), and the earlier rejection of anticipatory bail of co-accused Chandan Kumar (order dated 19.06.2024 in Cr.Misc. No. 31216/2024) and Rajiv Kumar (order dated 04.07.2024 in Cr.Misc. No. 36577/2024), rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 (Ashok Kumar, Kishan Rai @ Krishna Prasad, Gaurav Kumar and Shashi Kumar). Counsel for petitioners had urged false implication on suspicion and general, omnibus allegations without specific overt act.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29092 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2023 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna

======================================================

Ashok Kumar S/o Late Hari Gope Resident of Village- Jethuli, P.S.- Nadi, District-Patna, Bihar

Kishan Rai @ Krishna Prasad S/o Ram Pratap Rai Resident of VillageJethuli, P.S.- Nadi, District- Patna, Bihar

Shesnath Gope @ Shesh Narayan Yadav S/o Late Jagdish Gope Resident of Village- Jethuli, P.S.- Nadi, District- Patna, Bihar

Gaurav Kumar S/o Surendra Rai Resident of Village- Jethuli, P.S.- Nadi, District- Patna, Bihar

Shashi Kumar S/o Sheshnath Gope @ Shesh Narayan Yadav Resident of Village- Jethuli, P.S.- Nadi, District- Patna, Bihar

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : Mr.Saket Anand, Adv. For the State : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP For Informant : Mr.Sudhir Kumar Singh / Mr. D.K.Tiwari, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

5 10-01-2025

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners

seeks permission to withdraw this anticipatory bail petition so far as petitioner no. 3 (Shesnath Gope) is concerned, since during pendency of this bail petition, petitioner no. 3 has been arrested.

Permission is granted.

The anticipatory bail petition, in respect of

petitioner no. 3, stands dismissed as withdrawn.

The petitioners (petitioner nos. 1, 2, 4 & 5) apprehend their arrest in a case registered for offence under

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29092 of 2024(5) dt.10-01-2025 2/3

Sections 147, 148, 149, 120B, 395, 307, 436, 427 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per prosecution case, all the F.I.R. named accused persons including these petitioners pelted stones and fired upon police party. It is further alleged that accused persons also burnt police vehicles, parked outside the godown.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case only on suspicion. Allegation is general and omnibus and no specific overt act has been alleged against petitioners.

However, learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that as per F.I.R. itself, these petitioners alongwith others pelted stones, fired upon police party, as a result of which some of the police personnel sustained injury. He further submits that anticipatory bail petitions of two co-accused namely Chandan Kumar and Rajiv Kumar have already been rejected by this Court, vide order dated 19.06.2024 in Cr.Misc. No. 31216/2024 and order dated 04.07.2024 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 36577/2024. Besides this, petitioner no. 1, 4 & 5 have got one criminal antecedent.

Considering the nature of accusation, criminal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29092 of 2024(5) dt.10-01-2025 3/3

antecedent and the fact that bail petitions of two co-accused have already been rejected, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioners is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

anay

U T