Bachcha Manjhi @ Bacha Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7826 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2020 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== BACHCHA MANJHI @ BACHA MANJHI Son of Sonaful Manjhi Resident of Village - Dhenuki, P.s.- Panapur, Distt.- Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 354(B), 379, 436, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and on account of objection by the informant to the petitioner not to drain water on his land, the present occurrence took place wherein all the accused persons, including the petitioner, came to the house of the informant and started digging his land and further threatened the informant to institute a case against him under the S.C./S.T. Act if he objects. It is further alleged that in the meantime all the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7826 of 2022(2) dt.01-09-2022 2/3 accused persons, including the petitioner, came variously armed and against the petitioner, it is alleged that he assaulted Daroga Rai with farsa on head causing injury and thereafter it is alleged that other accused persons also assaulted as detailed in the F.I.R. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of assaulting Daroga Rai by farsa on head causing injury. Learned counsel asserts and submits that Daroga Rai has not suffered any injury on the head nor the impugned order records about injury of Daroga Rai.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Panapur P.S. Case No. 148 of 2020 subject to the conditions as laid down

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7826 of 2022(2) dt.01-09-2022 3/3 under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

The learned trial court before accepting the bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify whether Daroga Rai has suffered any injury on head or not. In the event, if he has suffered any injury on head, even if it is simple, then the present anticipatory bail order shall not be acted upon and in the event, if it is found that Daroga Rai did not suffer any injury on head, then the present order shall be acted upon forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T