Ayodhi Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10611 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-475 Year-2019 Thana- JAYNAGAR District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.

Ayodhi Das Son of Late Singheshwar Das @ Sideshwar Das Resident of Village - Parsa, P.S.- Jaynagar, District - Madhubani. 2.

Soukhi Das Son of Late Singheshwar Das @ Sideshwar Das Resident of Village - Parsa, P.S.- Jaynagar, District - Madhubani. 3.

Dukhi Das Son of Late Singheshwar Das @ Sideshwar Das Resident of Village - Parsa, P.S.- Jaynagar, District - Madhubani. 4.

Bhola Das Son of Late Muneshwar Das @ Bhuneshwar Das Resident of Village - Parsa, P.S.- Jaynagar, District - Madhubani. 5.

Manoj Das Son of Dukhi Das Resident of Village - Parsa, P.S.- Jaynagar, District - Madhubani.

6.

Ramesh Das Son of Ayodhi Das Resident of Village - Parsa, P.S.- Jaynagar, District - Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Braj Kishore Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-11-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners Sri Gagan Deo Yadav and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioners are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Jaynagar P.S. Case No. 475 of 2019 dated 21.09.2019 registered under Sections 147, 148, 341, 448, 323, 325, 307, 452, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset, submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10611 of 2020(2) dt.03-11-2021 2/3 The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that for the present he is not making any view beyond merit of the case rather draws the attention of the Court on para no.12 of the petition wherein it has been specifically written that the case has been compromised between the parties and good relation have been restored. Further, since there was a case and counter case and the petitioners and the informant are of the same village as such on intervention of the well-wisher, the case was compromised.

In view of the specific submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned A.P.P. for the State submits that since it has been submitted that the case has been compromised between the parties and good relation is prevailing, as such for the present he is not objecting the grant of provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners provided it is directed to the learned court below that the same be verified from the informant as to whether the case has been compromised or not.

Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the matter has been compromised and the petitioners will surrender in the court below on 22.11.2021. It is accordingly directed that the petitioners will

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10611 of 2020(2) dt.03-11-2021 3/3 surrender on 22.11.2021 in the court below when they shall be enlarged on provisional bail for the period of three months and simultaneously, the court below will issue notice to the informant of the case and on his appearance if the court below is satisfied that the parties have compromised the case, the court below will be at liberty to confirm the bail bond and in the event if the court below considers that the parties have not compromised the case, then the court below will be at liberty to cancel the provisional bail of the petitioners. (Satyavrat Verma, J) ravishankar/- U T