Pancham Ray And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.51787 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -210 Year- 2016 Thana -BHAGWANPUR DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================
1. Pancham Ray, Son of Ram Dayal Ray.
2. Ranjan Ray @ Ranjan Kumar, Son of Ram Dayal Ray. Both residents of Village-Ratanpura, P.S.-Bhagwanpur, District-Vaishali. .... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Vipin Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Shailendra Kumar -1, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-03-2018 This matter has come under the heading 'To Be Mentioned' at the instance of learned counsel for the informant appearing in the co-accused's case i.e., Cr. Misc. No. 14158 of 2018.
Learned counsel for the informant submits that the present case has been instituted under Sections 341, 342, 323, 307, 326, 498(A)/34 of the IPC and 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act. Later on, Section 304(B) of the I.P.C. was also added. The same is also evident from the order dated 20.09.2017 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-II, Vaishali at Hajipur. But for the reason best known to the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sections 304(B) and 307 of the IPC had not been
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51787 of 2017 (3) dt.22-03-2018 2/2 mentioned in paragraph no. 1 of the present application i.e., Cr. Misc. No. 51787 of 2017.
Therefore, vide order dated 09.11.2017, the petitioners were granted bail under impression that the case relates only for the offence under Section 498(A)/34 and other allied Sections of the IPC and 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, bail granted to the petitioners vide order dated 09.11.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 51787 of 2017 in connection with Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 210 of 2016, pending in the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur, is hereby cancelled.
Further, learned court below is directed to take all necessary steps for production of the above named petitioners in the aforesaid case.
U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T