Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 2061 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34547 of 2020
           Arising out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2020 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali
     ======================================================

1. Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar, (Male) aged about 19 years, son of Shri Ratnesh Kumar Yadav, resident of Village - Gopalpur, P.S. - Bidupur, District- Vaishali.

2. Vikky Kumar @ Vikram Kumar, (Male) aged about 19 years, son of Shri Ratnesh Kumar Yadav resident of Village - Gopalpur, P.S. - Bidupur, District- Vaishali.

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

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

     For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate
     For the State            :        Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP
     For the Informant        :        Mr. Yugal Kishore, Advocate

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 21-05-2021 The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

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

the petitioners; Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, learned Additional

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

State and Mr. Yugal Kishore, learned counsel for the informant.

3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with

Bidupur PS Case No. 153 of 2020 dated 05.05.2020 instituted

under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The allegation against the petitioners is of abusing the

brother of the informant while he was passing in front of his

house. Thereafter, it was alleged that co-accused Sanjay Rai

assaulted by sword on the head due to which the brother of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34547 of 2020 dt.21-05-2021

informant namely Ritesh Kumar died while going for treatment to

PMCH.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

against them there is no specific overt act alleged except for abuse.

It was submitted that incident had occurred in front of the house of

the petitioners and it was the informant's side who were the

aggressors and in such incident the mother of the petitioners had

received gun-shot injury and was treated. It was submitted that she

was treated at Bidupur Primary Health Centre and, thereafter,

Sadar Hospital, Hajipur for which Bidupur PS Case No. 158 of

2020 was instituted on 07.05.2020. It was submitted that at 8 PM

the incident is said to have occurred and there was no means of

identification with regard to the persons who had committed the

crime, if at all, it was committed and further that there is no

mentioning how the mother of the deceased received bullet injury.

Learned counsel submitted that even otherwise the informant party

were the aggressors who had come to look for the uncle of the

petitioners namely Sanjay Rai and tried to forcibly enter in the

house and, thus, but naturally there was resistance from the side of

the petitioners in which some incident has occurred, but they are

protected by their right to self-defence.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34547 of 2020 dt.21-05-2021

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

wounds have been found on the deceased; four on the head and

two on other parts of the body, which clearly indicates that there

was brutal assault by all the accused.

7. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that

independent witnesses have stated that all the accused, including

the petitioners, were mercilessly assaulting the deceased and six

injuries having been found on him, which clearly indicates that the

petitioners were also actively involved in the assault. Learned

counsel submitted that a few days prior to the incident, which

occurred at 9 PM on 02.05.2020, occurred for which Bidupur PS

Case No. 152 of 2020 was instituted under Sections 341, 323, 324

and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act by the

cousin of the deceased against the petitioners and other accused. It

was submitted that in retaliation, the present incident has occurred.

With regard to Bidupur PS Case No. 158 of 2020 lodged by the

wife of Ratnesh Kumar Yadav, father of the petitioners, the

occurrence is alleged to have taken place at 9.30 PM on

03.05.2020 whereas the present FIR is against the incident which

happened at 8 PM on 03.05.2020 and, thus, the two are

unconnected and the second case has no bearing in the present

case, as the two incidents were two separate transactions. It was Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34547 of 2020 dt.21-05-2021

submitted that the uncle of the petitioners, namely Sanjay Rai is

also accused in other cases under serious sections and even the

petitioners are accused in Bidupur PS Case No. 152 of 2020.

Learned counsel submitted that Arun Kumar, who is an eye-

witness and the informant; eye-witness Rahul Kumar; eye-witness

Rambabu and eye-witness Alok Kumar @ Pintu have identified

Sanjay Rai, Ranjan Kumar (petitioner no. 1), Sunny Kumar, Vicky

Kumar (petitioner no. 2) and Mukesh Singh, as the persons who

had brutally assaulted the deceased. He further submitted that Ram

Naresh Singh, another eye-witness, has also identified three

accused persons namely Sanjay Rai, Sunny Kumar and Mukesh

Singh and has stated that there were two other persons, though not

identified by him, but which clearly refers to the petitioners.

8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court

is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners.

9. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

10. Interim protection granted to the petitioners under

order dated 05.04.2021 stands vacated.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Vikash/-

AFR/NAFR U T