IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.23797 of 2011
Nawal Kishore Sharma, S/O-Late Tapeshwar Singh, R/O- Village-Pariyawan,
P.O-Atiyawan, P.S.-Ghoshi, District-Jehanabad .........Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Jitendra Kumar, S/O-Masudan @ Madhusudan Singh
3. Ripusudan Sharma, S/O-Late Ramasheesh Sharma
4. Ramasheesh Singh, S/O-Late Mukhlal Singh
All resident of Village-Pariyawan, Post-Atiyawan, P.S.-Ghoshi, District-
Jehanabad .........Opposite Parties.
-----------
02 27.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
This petition has been filed on behalf of the informant of
Ghoshi P.S. Case No. 240 of 2010 and it has been prayed in the
petition that privilege of bail granted to Opposite Parties No. 2 to 4
vide order dated 15.03.2011 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 3114 of 2011 be
cancelled.
Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that co-
accused Dharmendra Kumar obtained provisional bail from this Court
producing fake certificate but when the aforesaid fact was brought to
the notice of the Court, the provisional bail of co-accused was
cancelled by this Court vide order dated 23.05.2011 but before receipt
of the aforesaid order dated 23.05.2011 in the court below, the
aforesaid co-accused Dharmendra Kumar managed to get his release
from the judicial custody and subsequently, when the provisional bail
of the aforesaid co-accused Dharmendra Kumar was cancelled by the
court below in the light of order dated 23.05.2011 passed by this Court
in Cr. Misc. No. 16170 of 2011, the police went to arrest the aforesaid
co-accused Dharmendra Kumar but the petitioner and several others
2
created obstruction in the arrest of the aforesaid co-accused
Dharmendra Kumar and also attacked on the police party and got
released co-accused Dharmendra Kumar from the clutches of the
police party and for which another case i.e. Ghosi P.S. Case No. 146
of 2011 was registered against the opposite parties no.2 to 4 and other
accused.
It is further contended by him that the aforesaid act of
the opposite parties no. 2 to 4 would come under the ambit of misuse
of privilege of bail. So, their bail must be cancelled.
I am not at all convinced with the submission of learned
counsel for the petitioner because even if the opposite parties no. 2 to
4 had attacked on the police party for getting the release of co-accused
Dharmendra Kumar, another case has already been registered against
them and in my view, the aforesaid fact is not a ground for
cancellation of bail of the opposite parties no. 2 to 4.
In view of the aforesaid circumstance, I do not find any
force in this petition and accordingly, this petition stands dismissed on
admission stage itself.
SHAHZAD ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)