Patna High Court
Deepak Pandit @ Deepak Pandit vs The State Of Bihar on 23 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37750 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-317 Year-2020 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Deepak Pandit @ Deepak Panditt, aged about 28 years, Gender-Male, son of
Late Kapildev Pandit,
2. Pradeep Kumar Pandit, aged about 35 years, Gender- Male, son of Late
Kapil Dev Pandit,
3. Nitesh Kumar, aged about 18 years, Gender- Male, son of Ajay Kumar
Pandit.
All are resident of village - Balwa Rampurwa, P.S. - Bairiya, District - West
Champaran at Bettiah
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binay Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 23-07-2021
The matter has been heard via video conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. Binay Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioners; Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State
and Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the informant.
3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with
Bairiya PS Case No. 317 of 2020 dated 09.07.2020, instituted
under Sections 341, 323, 324, 379, 307, 504, 506/34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
4. The allegation against the petitioners is of assault
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37750 of 2020 dt.23-07-2021
on the son of the informant and specifically against the
petitioner no. 1 is of inflicting farsa blow on the head of the
informant and against the petitioner no. 3 is of assault on the son
of the informant on the ear by lathi due to which he sustained
injury and further, it has been alleged that all the accused took
Rs.11,400/- from the pocket of the informant and also snatched
gold chain from his son.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
as per the FIR itself it was the informant side, who had called on
mobile of the petitioners' due to which it is alleged that the
petitioners' side had threatened with dire consequences. It was
submitted that from the same it is obvious that the call had come
from the side of the informant and when a lady answered the
call, the informant's side had used obscene language. It was
submitted that this vital fact has been suppressed in the FIR.
However, it was submitted that since there is direct allegation of
attack by farsa against the petitioner no. 1 on the head on the
informant, which is corroborated by the injury report, he would
not seriously press the application on behalf of the petitioner
no.1, Deepak Pandit @ Deepak Panditt. Further, it was
submitted that against petitioner no. 2, there is absolutely no
overt act alleged and at best, he was only present when the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37750 of 2020 dt.23-07-2021
incident is said to have occurred. With regard to the petitioner
no. 3, it was submitted that the Court may consider the fact that
he is about 18 years old i.e., just on the verge of majority and it
is not expected that he would act in a manner what is expected
from a mature person, who is aware of the implications of his
act. Further, it was submitted that even otherwise, as per the
allegation, the attack was by lathi only on the ear which has
resulted in lacerated wound. Learned counsel submitted that
there is no criminal antecedent of the petitioners no. 1 and 2, but
against the petitioner no. 3, there is Complaint Case No. 1312 of
2020 under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973, relating to security and keeping peace.
6. Learned APP submitted that the petitioners were
together in the Act which has resulted in serious head injury to
the informant. However, it was not controverted that such injury
is specifically attributed to the petitioner no. 1.
7. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that
the petitioners had acted in a highhanded manner only for the
reason that a call was made on their mobile which shows their
conduct and aggressive nature.
8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of
the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37750 of 2020 dt.23-07-2021
the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within
six weeks from today, the petitioners no. 2 and 3, namely,
Pradeep Kumar Pandit and Nitesh Kumar, 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
1st, West Champaran at Bettiah, in Bairiya PS Case No. 317 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. 2 and 3,
(ii) that the petitioners no.2 and 3 and the bailors shall execute
bond and give undertaking with regard to good behaviour of the
petitioners no. 2 and 3, and (iii) that they shall cooperate with
the Court and the police/prosecution. Any violation of the terms
and conditions of the bonds or undertaking or failure to
cooperate 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 no. 2 and 3.
10. The prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner no.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37750 of 2020 dt.23-07-2021
1, Deepak Pandit @ Deepak Panditt, is rejected.
11. The petition stands disposed off in the
aforementioned terms.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
J. Alam/-
AFR/NAFR
U
T
