Raghu Mahato And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.33471 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -134 Year- 2017 Thana -CHAKAI District- JAMUI ======================================================
1. Raghu Mahato, son of Narayan Mahto @ Narayan
2. Mithilesh Mahato, son of Huro Mahato, Both Residents of Vill.- Gopidih P.S.- Chakai , District- Jamui. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binodanand Mishra, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyadev Prasad Singh Yadav, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Chakai P.S. Case No. 134 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 307 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted that petitioners have no criminal antecedent.
In the written report it is alleged that petitioner No. 1 assaulted Madhuri Devi with lathi on her head and petitioner No. 2 assaulted Bhabhi of the informant Surbhi Devi with lathi on her head.
The learned Sessions Judge has mentioned in the impugned order that injury of Madhuri Devi was abrasion and
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33471 of 2018 (2) dt.18-06-2018 2/2 injury of Surji Devi found on parietal region was simple in nature. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioners, named above, within six weeks from today, in connection with Chakai P.S. Case No. 134 of 2017, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-3, Jamui, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. with further conditions (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned,
(2) petitioners shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and their absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be liable to cancel their bail bond and (3) if petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioners. (Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- U T