Ranjit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5291 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-443 Year-2023 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Ranjit Kumar Son of Late Shiv Hari Yadav @ Shivhari Yadav Resident of Village- Rangpur, P.S.- Atri, District- Gaya, 2.

Ajit Kumar Son of Late Shiv Hari Yadav @ Shivhari Yadav Resident of Village- Rangpur, P.S.- Atri, District- Gaya, 3.

Jaymanti Devi Wife of Late Shiv Hari Yadav @ Shivhari Yadav Resident of Village- Rangpur, P.S.- Atri, District- Gaya 4.

Bindhu Kumari @ Sindhu Devi Wife of Ranjit Kumar Resident of VillageRangpur, P.S.- Atri, District- Gaya, 5.

Anita Devi @ Anita Kumari Wife of Ajit Kumar Resident of VillageRangpur, P.S.- Atri, District- Gaya, ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Binod Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 427, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, on 14.9.23 at about 5 PM, while informant was near his house along with his family members, in the meantime, all the F.I.R. named accused persons including these petitioners came there and started abusing. Upon

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5291 of 2025(2) dt.19-02-2025 2/3 protest, petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 having rod in their hands, assaulted upon the head of informant as a result of which he fell down and thereafter, when his family members came to save the informant, they were also assaulted by the accused persons.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that specific accusation of assault is against petitioner Nos. 1 and 2. So far rest of the petitioners are concerned, there is no allegation of specific overt act against them.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submits that petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 assaulted informant with rod and petitioner No. 1 has got three criminal antecedents.

6. Considering the specific accusation of assault, prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 is refused.

7. However, considering the nature of accusation against petitioner Nos. 3 to 5, the anticipatory bail with regard to petitioner Nos. 3 to 5 is allowed and it is ordered that the above named petitioner Nos. 3 to 5 in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5291 of 2025(2) dt.19-02-2025 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in connection with Atri P. S. Case No. 443 of 2023, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T