Rajiv Ranjan Singh @ Guddu And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32392 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -51 Year- 2015 Thana -ROHTAS District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================

1. Rajiv Ranjan Singh @ Guddu son of Suresh Singh

2. Shashikant Singh@Raj son of.......

3. Bihari Singh Son of Rajgir Singh All resident of village Jogidih , P.s Amjhor, District Rohtas.

4. Ravi Singh son of Ramvriksh singh Resident of village Ranjitganj, P.s Rohtas, district Rohtas.

5. Alok singh son of Hardeo singh Resident of Village Pararia,P.s Amjhor , district Rohtas.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sada Nand Ray For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ambika Bhagat(Spl.App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 18-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147,148,149,341,323,325,307, 379 and504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that admittedly there is case and counter case between the parties and the allegations as made in the FIR are wholly false and fabricated. So far as the allegation of taking caste name is concerned, the same is

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32392 of 2015 (2) dt.18-08-2015 P2/2 purely ornamental and has been added only with a view to make the offence grievous and the provision of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 cannot be invoked so as to make a case against the petitioners. He further submits that though the alleged offence is said to have taken place on the road but, there are no independence witnesses who have endorsed the allegations as made out against these petitioners.

Considering the aforementioned fact and circumstances and also the fact that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent, let the petitioners above named, in the event of their arrest / surrender within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the each amount to the satisfaction of the learned SubDivisional Judicial Magistrate, Dehri, Rohtas in connection with Rohtas (Amjhor) P.S. Case No. 51 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C.