Ramchandra Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5994 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2021 Thana- PIPRA District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.

Ramchandra Sah Son Of Kinulal Sah Resident Of Village - Dulari, Ward No. 15, Police Station - Pipra, District - Supaul. 2.

Babita Devi Wife of Ramchandra Sah Resident of Village - Dulari, Ward No. 15, Police Station - Pipra, District - Supaul. 3.

Tara Devi wife of Kinulal Sah Resident of Village - Dulari, Ward No. 15, Police Station - Pipra, District - Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajendra Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 03-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 326, 307, 379, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case as per F.I.R is that in the night of 06.07.2021, the son of the informant namely

2/4 Sanjay Sah had gone to collect his dues from petitioner No. 1. It is alleged that on hearing the noise, the informant went to the door of the accused persons along with other villagers where he has seen that his son was being abused and assaulted by accused persons including the petitioners and 4-5 unknown. It is further alleged that all the accused persons had caught hold the son of the informant and petitioner No. 1 assaulted him indiscriminately by means of dabiya, as a result of which, he sustained multiple injuries and blood started oozing out.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. There is counter version of the occurrence also and petitioners' side also received injuries. A statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioners have no criminal antecedents. Considering the fact that there is specific accusation against petitioner No. 1 that he assaulted

3/4 with dabiya to the son of the informant and the injuries report of the injured corroborates the prosecution version, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner No. 1.

The learned Court below may consider the prayer for regular bail of petitioner No. 1 without being prejudiced by the order of this Court and in accordance with law, if he surrenders within a period of four weeks from today and pray for regular bail.

So far as petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, since they are ladies and there is general and omnibus allegation against them, let the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousands) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, VIth, Supaul in connection with Pipra P.S.

4/4 Case No. 191 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Shageer/- U T