Anand Kumar @ Anand Ram vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 3221 Patna

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 34682 of 2020

  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2020 Thana- SAKURABAD District- Jehanabad
   ======================================================

1. Anand Kumar @ Anand Ram, male, aged about 45 years, son of Kapil Deo Ram @ Kapildeo Prasad

2. Vikash Kumar, male, aged about 19 years, son of Anand Kumar @ Anand Ram

3. Srikant Kumar @ Srikant Ram, male, aged about 35 years, son of Kapil Ram @ Kapildeo Prasad All are resident of Village- Narayanpur Math @ Narayanpur Mathia, Police Station- Shakurabad, District- Jehanabad.

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

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gyanand Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 09-07-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Gyanand Roy, learned counsel for the

petitioners and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional

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

State.

3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with

Shakurabad PS Case No. 58 of 2020 dated 22.04.2020,

instituted under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 504, 506/34

of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The allegation against the petitioners is that when Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 34682 of 2020 dt.09-07-2021

the informant came to their house to complain that the son of

petitioner no. 1 had plucked papaya from her tree, all the

accused who are family members, had abused and assaulted her

and when her other family members came, the petitioners and

others, variously armed, had also assaulted them with iron rod

resulting in injury on the head and of fracture on the arm,

besides other overt acts alleged against various accused persons.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

the genesis of the incident is absolutely trivial since in the FIR

itself it is stated that due to the son of the petitioner no. 1

plucking papaya from the tree of the informant, she had gone to

make a complaint. It was submitted that in such background,

clearly the informant side was the aggressor and the petitioners'

side only acted in self defence. It was submitted that for the

same incident, the petitioner no. 1 has instituted Shakurabad PS

Case No. 59 of 2020 on 24.04.2020 i.e., the same day, under

Sections 341/323/337/338/379/504/506/34 of the Indian Penal

Code. It was submitted that the petitioners' side has also

sustained injuries. Learned counsel submitted that though there

is allegation of inflicting blow by iron rod on the head against

petitioners, the same is not corroborated by the injury report as

such injures have been found to be simple in nature. Further, Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 34682 of 2020 dt.09-07-2021

with regard to petitioner no. 3, it was submitted that though the

allegation is specific of assault by iron rod on the head and

breaking of the bone of the hand, but that allegation is also

general and omnibus. Learned counsel submitted that the

petitioners have no other criminal antecedent.

6. Learned APP, from the case diary, submitted that

though as per the FIR, there is allegation of assault against all

the accused, including the petitioners, but the same is against

petitioners no. 1 and 2 of causing fracture on the hand of Bhikha

Yadav, which is not corroborated by the injury report, as after

X-ray no fracture has been found, but against the petitioner no.

3, it is specific of assault by iron rod on the head and fracture of

hand bone of Sri Ram Yadav, which is corroborated by the

injury report where fracture of arm and collar bone has been

found in X-ray.

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 no. 1 and 2, namely,

Anand Kumar @ Anand Ram and Vikash Kumar, respectively

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

(twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 34682 of 2020 dt.09-07-2021

each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Jehanabad in Shakurabad PS Case No. 58 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 no. 1 and 2, (ii) that the

petitioners no. 1 and 2 and the bailors shall execute bond with

regard to good behaviour of the petitioners no. 1 and 2, (iii) that

the petitioners no. 1 and 2 shall also give an undertaking to the

Court that they shall not indulge in any illegal/criminal activity,

act in violation of any law/statutory provisions, tamper with the

evidence or influence the witnesses, and (iv) that the petitioners

no. 1 and 2 shall cooperate with the Court and

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

the bonds or the undertaking or failure to cooperate shall lead to

cancellation of their bail bonds.

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

violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioners

no. 1 and 2, to the notice of the Court concerned, which shall

take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of

hearing to the petitioners no. 1 and 2.

9. Prayer for pre-arrest bail of petitioner no. 3, Srikant

Kumar @ Srikant Ram stands rejected.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 34682 of 2020 dt.09-07-2021

10. The petition stands disposed off in the

aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

Anjani/-

AFR/NAFR U T