Janardan Kamat @ Janardan Yadav And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.39498 of 2015 Arising out of PS.Case No. -26 Year- 2001 Thana -COMPLAINT CASE District- SUPAUL ======================================================

1. Janardan Kamat @ Janardan Yadav.

2. Mishri Sahani @ Mishri Mukhiya.

3. Jago Kamat.

4. Deo Narayan Kamat @ Deo Narain Kamat.

5. Satya Narayan Kamat @ Satyanarain Kamat.

6. Sunar Sada.

7. Chandradeo Sada.

8. Ramkishun Sada.

9. Umapati Kamat.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Ramsevak Kamat.

.... .... Opposite Parties.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Bhim Kumar Yadav, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kr. 1(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-09-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 26 C/2001 for the offences instituted under Sections 341, 323, 427, 379 and 504 of the IPC. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 16.01.2001 the informant was returning to his house by his bicycle to purchase the articles from the market and reached near the Hanuman Chawk, he saw that the accused persons were collecting Chanda by force at

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39498 of 2015 (2) dt.30-09-2015 2/3 the road near the farm of the informant. So, the informant restricted to collect the Chanda. Due to his reason, all the accused persons assaulted the informant and snatched some articles. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. All the offences are bailable except for offence under Section 379 of the IPC. As per the allegation, Section 379 IPC, it has been stated that the crop worth Rs. 100/- has been destroyed by the accused persons. It has been submitted that no summon has been received in respect to the aforesaid complaint case by the petitioners. From perusal of Annexure-A to the supplementary affidavit, it appears that there is no such service report to indicate that the petitioners had received any summon in respect to the present complaint case On behalf of the State it has been submitted that the petitioners are named in the complaint case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners above named, be released on bail in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of four weeks from today in connection with Complaint Case No. 26C of 2001 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. Ist Class, Supaul, subject to the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39498 of 2015 (2) dt.30-09-2015 3/3 conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T