Ranjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7627 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-184 Year-2019 Thana- GAYA KOTWALI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Ranjeet Kumar, Son of Lakhan Yadav, Resident of Village - Nawada, P.S.- Chandauti, Dist.- Gaya.
2.
Rohit Yadav, Son of Dasharath, Resident of Village - Nawada, P.S.- Chandauti, Dist.- Gaya.
3.
Jaiki Yadav, Son of Late Ramji Yadav, Resident of Village - Nawada, P.S.- Chandauti, Dist.- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Jai Narain Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 09-07-2020 Since as of now the Courts have not resumed normal physical hearing, the matter has been listed today for consideration through video conferencing.
The learned counsels are appearing and making submissions from their residence. The Court Master and Secretary are also part of this virtual Court proceedings from their homes, all with the aid of audio visual technology. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned APP for the State.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No.184 of 2019 [G.R.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7627 of 2020(3) dt.09-07-2020 2/3 No.2028/2019] registered for the offence punishable under Sections 387/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The allegation in the F.I.R. is that the petitioners have demanded Rs.10,000/- from an employee of the Company in whose favour the sand Ghat was settled. The petitioners also threatened that they will load sand and take it away for free and if any objection is raised, then they would destroy the computer and other articles in the office of the informant. Petitioner's counsel submits that from perusal of the F.I.R., it would be evident that the allegations are in respect of the occurrence dated 23.04.2019. However, the F.I.R. does not bear any date under the signature of the informant. The same has been lodged on 25.04.2019.
Submission is of false implication due to local party politics. It is further submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents and they shall be extending full cooperation to the investigation as well as the court where the case is pending.
Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for pre-arrest bail.
Considering the rival submissions, this Court is inclined to allow the petitioners' prayer for anticipatory bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7627 of 2020(3) dt.09-07-2020 3/3 Accordingly, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No.184 of 2019 [G.R. No.2028/2019], subject to the conditions as laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as also subject to the following conditions: (i) That one of the bailors of each of the petitioners will be a close relative of the petitioners who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioners concerned. The bailors will also undertake to inform the court if there is any change in the address of the petitioners.
(ii) That the petitioners will be well represented on each date and if they fail to do so on two consecutive dates, their bail bonds will be liable to be cancelled.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J) PNM U T