Bishundev Murmu @ Vishnudev Murmu @ Jatadhari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20613 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-279 Year-2017 Thana- MANIHARI District- Katihar ====================================================== BISHUNDEV MURMU @ VISHNUDEV MURMU @ JATADHARI S/o Late Khela Murmu R/o village- Bairgachhi, P.S.- Manihari, District- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shivendra Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajit Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through Virtual Court Proceedings. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 342 and 387 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 11.11.2020 and has antecedent of eight cases out of which he is on bail in seven cases and the informant alleges that on 23.07.2017 in the morning, he saw the accused persons including the petitioner coming towards his house variously armed, thereafter the accused persons who were 40-45 in number were also accompanied by lady members and cattle, it is next alleged that petitioner along with other named accused persons said the informant to tie the cattle in his house and to meet them with the same treatment which was given to Ashok Singh on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20613 of 2022(3) dt.06-01-2023 2/2 which the informant on hearing fled along with his family members, it is next alleged that thereafter the accused persons also committed loot of the articles and cash as detailed in the F.I.R. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner, it is next submitted that one Ram Ji Marandi had filed a case under Section 48E of the B.T. Act (Bihar Tenancy Act) and in retaliation of the same, the present F.I.R. came to be instituted with general and omnibus allegation.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Manihari P.S. Case No. 279 of 2017.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T