Arjun Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21802 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2018 Thana- MUSRIGHRARI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Arjun Rai, aged about 41 years (M), Son of Sone Lal Rai Resident of VillageBathua Bujurg Tole Milki, P.S.- Musrigharari, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vivek Anand Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 08-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
In this case, the petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Musrigharari P.S. Case No. 156 of 2018 registered for offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 332, 333, 307, 353, 379, 393, 283, 431/504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 of the Essential Service Maintenance Act. In the present case, an allegation has been made that 70-80 persons paralyzed the regular movement of the travelers. The petitioner has been named accused in the First Information Report to be involved in creating such nuisance. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21802 of 2019(2) dt.08-04-2019 2/2 from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Samastipur in connection with Musrigharari P.S. Case No. 156 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also subject to condition that whenever the police will call the petitioner for investigation/interrogation, he will remain present and if he would not present himself, the privilege of grant of anticipatory bail shall be deemed to have been canceled.
(Shivaji Pandey, J) rishi/- U T