Patna High CourtCR. MISC./11694/2015bail granted

Anil Rai And ORS. v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2015-04-27Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.11694 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -3209 Year- 2014 Thana -VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Anil Rai S/o Bhulan Rai

2. Sunil Rai S/o Bhulan Rai

3. Arun Rai S/o Yogendra Rai All Resident of Village Govindpur Jhakhraha, P.S. Raja Pakar, District Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Shashi Kant Kumar S/o Parmanand Rai Resident of Village Govindpur Jhakhraha, P.S. Raja Pakar, District Vaishali. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Smt. Anuradha Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akbar Ali (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 27-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 3209 of 2014 in which cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code.

The contention on behalf of the petitioners is that

petitioners are agnates of the complainant (opposite party no.

2) and prior to filing of the Complaint Case No. 3209 of 2014, the complainant had lodged Raja Pakar P.S. Case No. 151 of 2014 against the petitioners and the petitioners were enlarged on police bail in the aforesaid case as the said case had been registered under bailable sections and thereafter, the complainant has brought this false case against the petitioners. It is also pointed out on behalf of the petitioners that some coaccused have already been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by the learned court below itself but the prayer for anticipatory bail of these petitioners was rejected taking note of the allegations levelled in the complaint petition. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties and also this aspect of the matter that except the above stated Raja Pakar P.S. Case No.

Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur in Complaint Case No. 3209 of 2014 subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) SHAHZAD/- U T