Purushotam Pandey v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9661 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2019 Thana- ITARHI District- Buxar ====================================================== 1.
PURUSHOTAM PANDEY, S/o Rajnath Pandey, 2.
Uma Pandey @ Uma Shankar Pandey, S/o Late Ram Naresh Pandey, 3.
Rajendra Pandey, S/o Late Ramnaresh Pandey All are Residents of Village- Vishunpura, P.S.- Itarhi, Distt- Buxar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ashok Kumar Pandey, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 19-06-2020 This case has been heard through Video Conferencing.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 341, 324, 379, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case in brief is that the informant namely Arun Kumar Pandey gave written statement on 01.12.2019 that informant was at his home in the meantime named accused persons entered in the house and Roshan Pandey assaulted the informant by Farsa on head, Purshotam Pandey snatched
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9661 of 2020(2) dt.19-06-2020 2/3 Rs.10,000/- and snatched ear ring and chain from his wife, Rajnath Pandey assaulted by Farsa, Uma Pandey assaulted by lathi.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. There is case and counter case in between the parties. Allegation of snatching ear-ring and golden chain is totally false and concocted. There is land dispute between the parties and that land belongs to Bihar Government and no stair was broken by the petitioners. Petitioners Uma Pandey and Rajendra Pandey have not been living at village, they live in Delhi for work.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is admitted land dispute between the parties. There is injury is simple in nature and there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent. The similarly situated co-accused Raushan Pandey and Rajnath Pandey have been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 03.03.2020 in Cr. Misc. No.9979 of 2020.
Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail petition.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9661 of 2020(2) dt.19-06-2020 3/3 In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-6th, Buxar in connection with Itarhi P.S. Case No. 265 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) amitkumar/- U T