Scribd
Upload
8 views2 pages

Display PDF (4)

The Court of Sessions Judge in East Champaran rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Sanjay Pandey, who is accused in a case involving assaulting police officers during a raid. The petitioner claimed innocence and argued that he was falsely implicated, but the Public Prosecutor opposed the bail based on evidence in the case diary. The judge determined that the nature of the alleged offenses did not warrant granting pre-arrest bail.

Uploaded by

vivekkumarbhardwaj96
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
8 views2 pages

Display PDF (4)

The Court of Sessions Judge in East Champaran rejected the anticipatory bail petition of Sanjay Pandey, who is accused in a case involving assaulting police officers during a raid. The petitioner claimed innocence and argued that he was falsely implicated, but the Public Prosecutor opposed the bail based on evidence in the case diary. The judge determined that the nature of the alleged offenses did not warrant granting pre-arrest bail.

Uploaded by

vivekkumarbhardwaj96
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

In the Court of Sessions Judge, East Champaran, Motihari.

Present:-
Devraj Tripathi,
Sessions Judge,
East Champaran, Motihari

Anticipatory Bail Petition No.18 of 2023

Sanjay Pandey----------------------------------------------- Petitioner


Versus
The State of Bihar ------------------------------------ Opposite party.

Counsel for the Petitioner :- Sri Rajeev Kumar Diwedi, Advocate.


Counsel for the State :- Sri Digvijay Narayan Sinha, Public Prosecutor I/C.

12-01-2023
This is an anticipatory bail petition filed on behalf of the petitioner-
accused Sanjay Pandey, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Motihari
Muffasil P.S. Case No.868 of 2022 for the offences U/S 225, 341, 323, 332 and 353/34
of the I.P.C.
The case of prosecution, in brief, is that in the night of 10-12-2022, when
the informant along with police party conducted raid to arrest accused of Kotwa P.S.
Case No.460 of 2022 in the house of accused Vijay Pandey, all the F.I.R. named
accused persons including this petitioner-accused started scuffling with the police party
and they also assaulted the police party and caused hinderance in performing their
official duty. Accused persons also helped the accused of Kotwa P.S. 460 of 2022 in
fleeing away.
The learned counsel for the petitioner-accused has submitted that earlier
no any anticipatory or regular bail petition has been filed on behalf of this petitioner-
accused either before this Court or before the Hon’ble High Court, Patna and this
petitioner-accused is also involved in two more case i.e. (i) Motihari Muffasil P.S. Case
No.93 of 2016 and (ii) Chiraiya P.S. Case No.83 of 2017. It is further submitted that
this petitioner-accused is innocent and he has committed no offence, as alleged and the
allegations, as mentioned in the written petition of the informant, are false and
concocted and the petitioner-accused has falsely been implicated in this case by the
police. It is further submitted that this petitioner-accused has no concerned with the
alleged occurrence and there is no specific allegation of overt act against this petitioner-
accused and this petitioner-accused has not caused any hinderance in performing
official duty of informant. On these basis, it is prayed to allow this anticipatory bail
petition.
12-01-2023 Anticipatory Bail Petition No.18 of 2023
Continue Page-2-
The learned Public Prosecutor I/C appearing on behalf of the State has
opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of this petitioner-accused on the basis of
materials available in the case diary.
Having heard both sides and perusal of F.I.R. as well as case diary and
keeping in view the nature of offence as alleged against this petitioner-accused in the
F.I.R., I am not inclined to give privilege of pre-arrest bail to this petitioner-accused.
Hence, the anticipatory bail petition filed on behalf of above-named petitioner-accused
is rejected.
(Dictated)
Sd/-
Sessions Judge
East Champaran, Motihari
12-01-2023

You might also like