Tetar Rai @ Dinesh Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16807 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2020 Thana- DHANKUND District- Banka ====================================================== 1.

TETAR RAI @ DINESH RAI SON OF GENA RAI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- DHANGARSA, POLICE STATION- DHANKUND, DISTRICT- BANKA.

2.

PAWAN RAI SON OF LATE BANARSI RAI RESIDENT OF VILLAGEDHANGARSA, POLICE STATION- DHANKUND, DISTRICT- BANKA. 4.

KAPILDEO RAI SON OF LATE BANARSI RAI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- DHANGARSA, POLICE STATION- DHANKUND, DISTRICT- BANKA.

5.

NEMANI RAI SON OF LATE ANARSI RAI RESIDENT OF VILLAGEDHANGARSA, POLICE STATION- DHANKUND, DISTRICT- BANKA. 6.

RAJNISH RAI SON OF LATE SHALIGRAM RAI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- DHANGARSA, POLICE STATION- DHANKUND, DISTRICT- BANKA.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Praveen Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 04-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Dhankund P.S. Case No. 27 of 2020 registered under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16807 of 2021(2) dt.04-01-2022 2/3 Code.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner nos. 2, 4 and 5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the petitioners opposed the prayer of the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 by contending that in the first information report, there is specific allegation of assault against them and the injury also corroborates the same. Hence, petitioner nos. 1 and 3 do not deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the State, prayer of the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 is rejected and prayer of the petitioner nos. 2, 4 and 5 for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed.

Let the above named petitioner nos. 2, 4 and 5 be released on bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the S.D.J.M., Banka in connection with Dhankund P.S. Case No. 27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16807 of 2021(2) dt.04-01-2022 3/3 of 2020, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) shailendra/- U T