Md Hemza And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11362 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-674 Year-2018 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.

MD. HEMZA, Son of Md. Mumtiyaz Rain 2.

Md. Kaushar Rain @ Md. Kausar @ Md. Kaushar Rai @ Md. Kaushav Rain, Son of Md. Thegu Rain Both are Resident of Village - Bhadauni, P.S. Town Nawada District Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar Verma For the Opposite Party/s :

None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 26-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. No one appears on behalf of the State to oppose this application. Petitioners are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 674 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is a case and counter case between the petitioners' side and the informant's side. Both are said to be own gotiyas and seems to have indulged in free fight. It is further submitted that the injuries said to have been caused by the petitioners are simple in nature and those have been caused by hard and blunt substance.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11362 of 2019(2) dt.26-02-2019 2/2 Considering the nature of the allegations and the relationship between the parties as also that the injuries are simple in nature, instead of extending the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, this Court thinks it just and proper to direct them to surrender and pray for regular bail in the court below within a period of four weeks from today which will be considered by the court below and shall be disposed off on the same day keeping in mind the aforesaid facts. It is made clear that prayer for regular bail of the petitioners shall not be rejected only because this Court has not extended the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/- U T