Jyoti Kumar @ Avinash vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 1955 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33938 of 2020
         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-508 Year-2019 Thana- MANER District- Patna
======================================================

Jyoti Kumar @ Avinash (Male) aged about 21 years, Son of Anil Kumar Singh Resident of Village-Sherpur, Police Station-Maner, District-Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Helal Ahmad, Advocate For the State : Ms. Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 16-04-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Md. Helal Ahmad, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Ms. Suman Kumari Singh, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the

State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Maner PS Case No. 508 of 2019 dated 15.10.2019, instituted

under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 504, 506/34 of the Indian

Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

4. The allegation against the petitioner and others is of

assault on the informant leading to injury and specifically against

the petitioner that he gave iron rod blow on the head of the

informant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33938 of 2020 dt.16-04-2021

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he

has filed supplementary affidavit in view of there being

typographical error with regard to the sections in the other case

i.e., Maner PS Case No. 311 of 2016, which has been lodged

against him. It was submitted that instead of Section 141 which

has wrongly been typed in paragraph no 3, the same should have

been Section 341. Thus, prayer was made that the Section should

be read as 341 instead of 141. Prayer allowed.

6. It was submitted by him that the petitioner has been

falsely implicated due to village politics. Learned counsel

submitted that nothing major happened and only some skirmish

may have taken place and for the same also, co-accused Sunil

Kumar has lodged Maner PS Case No. 503 of 2019 on

12.10.2019, whereas the present case has been lodged on

15.10.2019, after much delay. Learned counsel submitted that the

injury report of the informant also is from a private hospital and

though it shows head injury which is grievous, but neither details

of the injury nor any supporting document like x-ray etc. have

been mentioned. Learned counsel submitted that even the date is

14.10.2019 in the accident register. It was submitted that co-

accused Anil Kumar Singh @ Anil Ray, Sunny Kumar @ Sunny

Rai and Raju Kumar have been granted anticipatory bail by a co-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33938 of 2020 dt.16-04-2021

ordinate Bench in Cr. Misc. No. 25698 of 2020 by order dated

14.10.2020.

7. Learned APP, from the case diary, submitted that the

injury report was also called for and it shows that the informant

had been given treatment. It was further submitted that the injury

report itself discloses that the date of entry of the informant was

08.10.2019, which is the date of the incident. Learned counsel

submitted that the statement of the informant was recorded by the

police on 09.10.2019 itself as has also been endorsed by the police

officer concerned and it may have taken some time to reach the

police station concerned and, thus, if there is any delay, it was due

to the police in forwarding the statement of the informant to the

concerned police station; whereas, in the case of the accused, the

statement itself was given on 12.10.2019, i.e., after four days of

the incident. Thus, it was submitted that the second FIR by the co-

accused is by way of a counter blast to create a defence in the

present case. Learned counsel submitted that witnesses have stated

with regard to the petitioner being the person who had inflicted

iron rod blow on the head of the informant and, therefore, his case

cannot be said to be on similar footing to co-accused Anil Kumar

Singh @ Anil Ray, Sunny Kumar @ Sunny Rai and Raju Kumar.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33938 of 2020 dt.16-04-2021

8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court

is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

9. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T