High CourtsSingle Bench

Dilip Bharti vs State Of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 29 January 2021 · Citation: (2021) 01 PAT CK 0247

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 332, 333, 341, 353, 379, 504, 506
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 28083 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 332 words
1.

Heard Mr. Manish Kumar No.2, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter

referred to as the ‘APP’) for the State.

2.

The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Civil Lines PS Case No.458 of 2019 dated 09.10.2019, instituted under Sections 147/ 148/ 149/

323/ 341/ 504/ 506/ 353/ 379/ 307/ 332/ 333 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The allegation against the petitioner and four named and 10-15 unknown persons is of attacking the police by lathi, danda and stick. Further,

specifically against the petitioner is of snatching the purse of a policeman in which there was cash Rs.3200/- and important documents.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the name taken by the police of five persons itself raises doubt about the veracity of the allegation

as in a mob, identification is difficult. It was further submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and the general and omnibus allegation is

of attacking the police party. Learned counsel submitted that co-accused, Rajesh Ram, has been granted anticipatory bail on 20.01.2021 in Cr. Misc.

No.31527 of 2020.

5.

Learned APP submitted that the police was attacked and the identification of the petitioner has been made as he was resident under the same

police station. It was submitted that the allegation against, Rajesh Ram, who has been granted anticipatory bail, is general and omnibus, but with regard

to the petitioner it is specific of snatching Rs.3200/- and important documents from the police personnel. It was further submitted that injuries have

also been found on a constable. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner and others attacking a police party is a brazen show of confrontation

with the administration which sends wrong signal to the masses at large.

6.

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.

7.

Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.