Bihari Rai vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4868 Patna

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 51618 of 2021
            Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2021 Thana- DORIGANJ District- Saran
      ======================================================

1. Bihari Rai, Male, aged near about 65 years, Son of Triveni Rai.

2. Suresh Rai @ Tinku Rai, Male, aged near about 43 years, Son of Bihari Rai.

3. Pramod Kumar, Male, aged near about 27 years, Son of Bihari Rai.

4. Bikram Kumar, Male, aged near about .... years Son of Bihari Rai.

5. Ashok Rai, Male, aged near about 38 years, Son of Triveni Rai.

6. Vinod Kumar, Male, aged near about 28 years, Son of Bihari Rai.

All 1 to 6 resident of Village- Musepur Balua, PS- Doriganj, District- Saran.

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

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

      For the Petitioner/s    :        Mr. S S P Yadav, Advocate
      For the State           :        Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 05-10-2021

The case has been taken up out of turn on the basis of

motion slip filed by learned counsel for the petitioners, which was

allowed.

2. Heard Mr. S S P Yadav, learned counsel for the

petitioners and Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51618 of 2021 dt.05-10-2021

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he

may be permitted to withdraw the petition on behalf of petitioner

no. 6, namely, Vinod Kumar, as he has been arrested.

4. In view thereof, as prayed for by learned counsel for

the petitioners, the petition on behalf of petitioner no. 6, namely,

Vinod Kumar, stands disposed of as withdrawn and is restricted to

petitioners no. 1 to 5.

5. The petitioners no. 1 to 5 apprehend arrest in

connection with Doriganj PS Case No. 29 of 2021 dated

15.06.2021, instituted under Sections 374, 323 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860 to which later on Section 307 and 379/34 of the Indian

Penal Code was added.

6. As per the FIR, the petitioners and others had come

armed with lathi, danda and iron rod and had assaulted the

informant party and specifically against petitioner no. 6 that he

had assaulted the informant by iron rod.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

parties are agnates and this is a totally false case. It was submitted

that due to land dispute some minor incident happened between

the parties and the petitioner no. 2 has also lodged Doriganj PS

Case No. 130 of 2021 for the same incident. It was submitted that

both the sides have sustained injury but they are simple in nature.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51618 of 2021 dt.05-10-2021

Learned counsel submitted that the assault attributed to petitioners

no. 1 to 5 is only by lathi and danda and specific against the

petitioner no. 6 that he assaulted by iron rod, but not against

petitioners no. 1 to 5. Learned counsel submitted that the

petitioners no. 1 to 5 have no other criminal antecedent. It was

submitted that though against petitioner no. 2 also, there is

specific allegation of assault on the brother of the informant by

iron rod but no injury has been caused as no report has been

produced, either before the Court or before the police during

investigation.

8. Learned APP submitted that against petitioner no. 2

also there is specific allegation of assault by iron rod.

9. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, having

regard to the fact that there is general and omnibus allegation

against petitioners no. 1 to 5 of being armed with lathi and danda

and no injury report of the brother of the informant having been

produced and they also not having any other criminal antecedent

and being agnates and also there being counter case for the same

incident, the Court is inclined to allow the prayer for pre-arrest

bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51618 of 2021 dt.05-10-2021

10. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender

before the Court below within six weeks from today, petitioner no.

1, namely, Bihari Rai; petitioner no. 2, namely, Suresh Rai @

Tinku Rai; petitioner no. 3, namely, Pramod Kumar; petitioner no.

4, namely, Bikram Kumar and petitioner no. 5, namely, Ashok

Rai, 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 Concerned Court in Doriganj PS

Case No. 129 of 2021, 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

said petitioners, (ii) that the said petitioners and the bailors shall

execute bond and give undertaking with regard to good behaviour

of the said petitioners and that the said petitioners shall co-operate

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

and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking or failure to co-

operate shall lead to cancellation of their bail bonds.

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

violation of the foregoing conditions by the said petitioners, to the

notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate action

on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the concerned

petitioners.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51618 of 2021 dt.05-10-2021

12. The petition stands disposed of in the

aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T