Chandan Kumar vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 3220 Patna

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 37173 of 2020

       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-181 Year-2020 Thana- G.B. NAGAR District-Siwan
   ======================================================

1. Chandan Kumar, aged about 22 years (M), son of Manbodh Gupta.

2. Manbodh Gupta, aged about 55 years (M), son of Late Thakur Sah. Both residents of Village-Pipara Narayan, P.S.-G.B. Nagar, District-Siwan.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

  For the Petitioner/s    :       Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, Advocate
  For the State           :       Ms. Asha Devi, APP
  For the Informant       :       Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh, Advocate

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 09-07-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for

the petitioners; Ms. Asha Devi, learned Additional Public

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

and Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the informant.

3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with

G.B. Nagar PS Case No. 181 of 2020 dated 14.07.2020,

instituted under Sections 341/323/307/379/504/506/34 of the

Indian Penal Code.

4. The allegation against the petitioners and others is

that they were armed with lathi and farsa and started abusing Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 37173 of 2020 dt.09-07-2021

the informant side and thereafter it is alleged that the petitioner

no. 1 inflicted blow by farsa on the head of Papu

Sah, the son of the informant, and against petitioner no. 2 is that

he had assaulted by farsa on the head of the informant and

against another co-accused is that she snatched gold chain worth

Rs. 15,000/- from the neck of the informant

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

they are neighbours and there is road in between their house and

there was dispute with regard to putting of peg for tying of cattle

and for feeding of cattle on the road due to which the Sarpanch

tried to intervene but a fight erupted. Learned counsel submitted

that for the same incident there is a counter case and there is

injury caused on the side of the petitioners also. Learned

counsel submitted that though there is specific allegation of

blow by farsa on the head of two victims by the petitioners but

the injury report discloses that on the head, lacerated wound has

been found which is simple in nature caused by hard blunt

substance and the CT of the brain does not disclose any damage.

It was contended that in the case filed by the petitioners' side,

the informant side has been granted anticipatory bail by the

Court below itself and further that the petitioners have no other

criminal antecedent. Learned counsel submitted that during Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 37173 of 2020 dt.09-07-2021

investigation the Sarpanch has said that it was the informant

side who were the aggressors.

6. Learned APP submitted that there is allegation of

attack by farsa on the head of the victims against the petitioners.

7. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that

the petitioners by attacking with farsa on the head clearly

intended to cause grievous and serious harm on the victims and,

thus, the allegation in the FIR is proved. However, when

confronted with the injury reports, he was not in a position to

controvert that the same does not corroborate the allegation of

farsa blow on the head as the injury is simple without any

damage found in the CT scan and the doctor has opined that it

was caused by hard blunt substance

8. 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, Siwan in G.B. Nagar

PS Case No. 181 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down in

Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 37173 of 2020 dt.09-07-2021

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 and give undertaking with regard to good behaviour of the

petitioners, and (iii) that the petitioners shall cooperate with the

Court and the police/prosecution. Any violation of the terms and

conditions of the bonds or the undertaking or non-cooperation

shall lead to cancellation of their bail bonds.

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

violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioners,

to the notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate

action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the

petitioners.

10. The petition stands disposed off in the

aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

Anjani/-

AFR/NAFR U T