Mukesh Poddar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.16724 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -101 Year- 2016 Thana -BANGAON District- SAHARSA ======================================================
1. Mukesh Poddar
2. Rajesh Poddar @ Rajesh Kumar Poddar Both Son of Late Chandeshwari Poddar
3. Bablu Poddar
4. Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjit Poddar Both Son of Late Ramsevak Poddar
5. Subhash Poddar Son of Late Kameshwar Poddar
6. Rakesh Kumar Yadav Son of Mahendra Prasad Yadav All R/O Bariyahi Bazar, P.S.-Bangaon, District-Saharsa
7. Sushil Yadav Son of Laxman Yadav R/o bariyahi Basti, P.s.-Bangaon, District-Saharsa .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brajesh Kumar, Advocate For the informant : Mr. Anirudh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 13-04-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Bangaon P.S. Case No. 101 of 2016, registered for offences punishable under Section 147,148,149, 341,323, 307, 384, 386, 379, 380, 427, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-b) a,26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act. The allegation, as per the FIR, is about demand of extortion of Rs. 3 lacs as well as assault, i.e., general and omnibus. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16724 of 2017 (2) dt.13-04-2017 2/3 for the occurrence of the same date, the petitioner no. 1 has filed a Complaint Case first against the Police Officers and the informant which has been registered as Bangaon P.S. Case No. 104/2016 and due to the above facts, the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case which is apparent from the fact that though there is allegation of firing but no injury has been received by any of the prosecution party.
Heard learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant has admitted that the injuries are superficial, i.e., bruise and abrasion but it is submitted that no specific allegation has been made against the informant in the complaint case and later on after inordinate delay police case has been registered after lodging of U.D. case. Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners surrender before the court below within a period of three weeks, and the court below will release the petitioners on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to its satisfaction with the conditions (i) one of the bailors of the petitioners shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned court and (ii) the petitioners shall co-operate in the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16724 of 2017 (2) dt.13-04-2017 3/3 investigation of the case and make himself available as and when required by the police.
With the aforesaid observation, this application is allowed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) S.Pandey/- U T