Ravindra Ray @ Ravindra Kumar Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11534 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-392 Year-2023 Thana- ROSERA District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.

RAVINDRA RAY @ RAVINDRA KUMAR RAY S/o Late Sudhir Ray Resident of Village-Mahraur, PS-Rosera, District-Samastipur, Bihar-848101 2.

UMANATH RAY Son of Nand Kishore Ray Resident of Village-Mahraur, PS-Rosera, District-Samastipur, Bihar-848101 3.

CHANDRAHAS RAY Son of Nand Kishore Ray Resident of VillageMahraur, PS-Rosera, District-Samastipur, Bihar-848101 4.

BACHANDEV RAY S/o Shubhkant Ray Resident of Village-Mahraur, PSRosera, District-Samastipur, Bihar-848101 ... ... Petitioners.

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 12-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Rosera P.S. Case No.392 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 504 & 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. All the F.I.R. named accused persons including these petitioners in furtherance of their common intention armed with deadly weapons are said to have assaulted the informant and his family members with intention to kill them

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11534 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 2/3 due to which they sustained injuries on vital part also. The reason behind the occurrence is said to be plucking of the mango from the orchard of the Math.

4. The petitioners are quite innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case due to previous grudge. It is further submitted that there is case and counter case between the parties. The petitioners' side filed the case against the informant and others earlier to the case under hand. The allegations levelled against the petitioners is general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that there is a land dispute between the informant and the petitioner no.1. There is an agreement between the mahant of the temple and the petitioner for selling the fruits from the temple's orchard and this agreement has been the eyesore for the informant. In order to coerce the petitioners and his family members to give up the management of the land and the orchard, the instant FIR has been filed by the informant.

5. Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioners is serious in nature, hence they do not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11534 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 3/3 am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioners surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U