Langat Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.371 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2024 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Langat Ray S/O Bhujhawan Ray R/o Vill. - Bariyarpur, P.S- Piprakothi, Dist. - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Priyesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 05-02-2025 Heard Mr. Priyesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Matloob Rab, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 25.08.2024, in connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 117 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 07.06.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 312, 325, 379, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons had hit on the stomach of sisterin-law of the informant who was pregnant with three months due to which she had severe pain in stomach and later there was miscarriage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.371 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2025 2/3 present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. itself that due to admitted land dispute the present occurrence had taken place. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. itself that the date of occurrence as alleged in the F.I.R. is 30.05.2024 but the present F.I.R. was instituted on 07.06.2024 after delay of seven days without giving any explanation of delay. He further submits that there is no specific allegation of any assault of overt act attributed against the petitioner rather there is general and omnibus allegation against the accused persons including the petitioner. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 25.08.2024.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and apart from that the petitioner carries two more cases other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph3 of the bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in the pending matters.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari in connection

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.371 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2025 3/3 with Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 117 of 2024, subject to the following conditions :-

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T