Ajit Sharma vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4284 Patna

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 37735 of 2020
     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2020 Thana- SIKARHATTA District- Bhojpur
 ======================================================

Ajit Sharma, aged about 50 years, Male, Son of Late Moti Sharma, Resident of Village Chanda, PS- Sikarahatta, District- Bhojpur (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

 For the Petitioner/s    :        Mr. Jai Prakash Singh, Advocate
 For the State           :        Mr. Nand Kumar, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 24-08-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for

the petitioner and Mr. Nand Kumar, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Sikarahatta PS Case No. 28 of 2020 dated 02.04.2020, instituted

under Sections 341, 323, 504, 308 and 447/34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had

come to the house of the informant and started quarreling and

when the informant tried to pacify him by saying that the

quarrel between the children keeps on happening, the petitioner

is said to have assaulted her with thin iron rod on the head

resulting in injuries and further that all the accused persons had Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37735 of 2020 dt.24-08-2021

assaulted her, her husband as also her daughter with fists and

slaps.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner on 23.07.2021 had

submitted that the parties are next door neighbours and there was

dispute with regard to drainage of water and thus this false case

has been instituted. It was submitted that the informant has

suffered only lacerated wound injury on the mid-line of the skull

but opinion has been reserved for X-ray report.

6. Having regard to the aforesaid, the Court had asked

learned APP to obtain the up-to-date legible photocopy of the

entire case diary as also the injury report, including the final injury

report/s of the victims, from the Superintendent of Police,

Bhojpur.

7. Learned APP submitted that he has received the case

diary and the report in which it has been stated that upon inquiry

from the concerned Primary Health Centre, it transpires that no

final report has been prepared.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

there are five accused persons in the present case, including the

petitioner. It was submitted that the petitioner along with co-

accused Tara Muni Devi and Madhu Kumari had filed ABP No.

870 of 2020, in which the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XIII, Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37735 of 2020 dt.24-08-2021

Bhojpur at Ara, by order dated 10.07.2020 had granted the other

two co-accused anticipatory bail but had rejected the prayer of the

petitioner because there was specific allegation of him having

caused injury on the head by iron rod. Learned counsel submitted

that the parties have now also settled the matter and filed

compromise petition in the Court concerned on 06.08.2021 stating

that cordial relationship has been restored and the matter has been

amicably settled. In support of the same, he drew the attention of

the Court to Annexure-1 of his supplementary affidavit. It was

submitted that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedent.

9. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, having

regard to the fact that the parties are next door neighbours as also

that the injury report shows only a lacerated wound on the mid-

line of the skull near vertex as also there being compromise and

harmony established between them, to put an end to the

controversy, for the larger ends of justice, the Court is inclined to

allow the prayer for pre-arrest bail.

10. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender

before the Court below within six weeks from today, the petitioner

be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/-

(twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37735 of 2020 dt.24-08-2021

to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM 8 th Bhojpur at Ara in

Sikarahatta PS Case No. 28 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid

down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

and further,and further, (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close

relative of the petitioner, (ii) that the petitioner and the bailors

shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to good

behaviour of the petitioner and (iii) that the petitioner shall co-

operate with the Court and police/prosecution. Any violation of

the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking or failure

to co-operate shall lead to cancellation of his bail bonds.

11. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any

violation of the foregoing conditions by the petitioner, to the

notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate action

on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

                     12.    The     petition      stands     disposed         of   in   the

           aforementioned terms.


                                              (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR
U
T