Patna High Court
Mukti Narayan Ray @ Mukti Narayan ... vs The State Of Bihar on 9 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 31711 of 2020
Arising Out of PS Case No.-22 Year-2020 Thana- AZIMABAD District- Bhojpur
======================================================
1. Mukti Narayan Ray @ Mukti Narayan Singh, aged about 48 years, (Male),
Son of Late Jai Narayan Ray, aged about 48.
2. Priyesh Ray @ Priyesh Kumar, aged about 26 years.
3. Lallu Ray @ Deepak Kumar, aged about 22 years.
Both are son of Mukti Narayan Ray.
4. Badri Narayan Ray, Son of Sudama Rai, aged about 40 years.
5. Deep Narayan Ray, Son of Badri Narayan Ray, aged about 23 years.
6. Bipin Ray, Son of Kameshwar Ray, aged about 55 years.
7. Guddu Ray, Son of Late Uma Rai, aged about 30 years.
8. Ankit Ray, Son of Badri Narayan Ray, aged about 20 years.
All are resident of Village - Mehandaura, Police Station - Azimabad, District
- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN
AMANULLAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 09-02-2021
The matter has been heard via video conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel
for the petitioners and Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the
State.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31711 of 2020 dt.09-02-2021
3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with
Azimabad PS Case No. 22 of 2020 dated 20.07.2020, instituted
under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian
Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
4. The allegation against the petitioners is that they had
abused the informant and thereafter had gone home and had
started firing from their door. It is further alleged that co-accused
Santosh Ray came to the door of the informant, whose brother
Pintu Choudhary was standing and fired on his hand. It has also
been stated that there was hot talk between Pintu Choudhary and
the accused persons which was the cause of the incident.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
allegations are totally false and frivolous and at best it is against
co-accused Santosh Ray, not before this Court, who had fired on
Pintu Choudhary hitting him on the hand. Learned counsel
submitted that the entire family members have been implicated for
oblique reasons and village politics. It was further submitted that
the petitioners have no criminal antecedent.
6. Learned APP submitted that the allegation of firing is
against all persons. However, he did not controvert that the
specific allegation of firing is against co-accused Santosh Ray,
injuring Pintu Choudhary in his hand.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31711 of 2020 dt.09-02-2021
7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the
case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in the
event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six
weeks from today, the petitioners be released on bail upon
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur, Ara in Azimabad PS
Case No. 22 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down in
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and
further, (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the
petitioners, (ii) that the petitioners and the bailors shall execute
bond with regard to good behaviour of the petitioners, and (iii) the
petitioners shall cooperate in the case. Any violation of the terms
and conditions of the bonds or failure to cooperate shall lead to
cancellation of their bail bonds.
8. The application stands disposed off in the
aforementioned terms.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)
P. Kumar
AFR/NAFR
U
T
