JAYA ROY, J. - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
(2.) THE counsel of the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is an accused in a case registered under Sections 147/323/341/379/34 of the I.P.C. After investigation, the police has submitted charge -sheet under Sections 341/323/325/34 of the Indian Penal Code. But the Court below has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 147/341/323/379/325/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner earlier filed anticipatory bail application in connection with the aforesaid case i.e. A.B.A. No. 2785 of 2011 but after hearing the parties, this Court has rejected the petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail by the order dated 7.2.2012 (before filing of the charge -sheet).
(3.) IT is further contended that after investigation, the police has found the allegation under Section 379 I.P.C. is not true and submitted charge sheet only under Section 341/323/325/34 I.P.C. and the petitioners have been released on bail by the police authority as all the sections in which allegations are found true in investigation, are bailable in nature but the learned Court below has taken cognizance of the offence under Sections 147/341/323/379/325/34 I.P.C. against all the petitioners by its 2 A.B.A. No 1176 of 2013 order dated 01.10.2012. It is further submitted earlier when the prayer of the petitioner was refused by this Court, the charge sheet was not submitted by the police against the petitioner but now in change in facts and circumstances that the police has not found the allegation as true under Section 379 I.P.C. and as other alleged offence are bailable in nature, the petitioners are entitled for anticipatory bail.;