Pappu Singh @ Pappu Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.21831 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -24 Year- 2017 Thana -DALSINGHSARAI District- SAMASTIPUR ======================================================
1. Pappu Singh @ Pappu Kumar, Son of Devnarayan Singh
2. Tejnarayan Singh, Son of Devnarayan Singh
3. Sujeet Singh, Son of Dev Narayan Singh
4. Devnarayan Singh, Son of Late Hoghi Singh
5. Sona Devi, Wife of Devnarayan Singh
6. Reena Devi, Wife of Tejnarayan Singh All Residents of Village- Basadhiya, P.S.-Dalsinghsarai, DistrictSamastipur. .... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S,N.P.Sinha, Sr. Adv. Ms. Rashmi Bharti, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. None. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-07-2017 Heard Sri Suraj Narayan Prasad Sinha, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Ms. Rashmi Bharti, learned counsel for the petitioners. None appeared on behalf of the State. Six petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer to extend the privilege of bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender in Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No.24 of 2017 registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 376, 511 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that both petitioners side and informant side are agnates
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21831 of 2017 (4) dt.19-07-2017 2/3 and litigation in between the parties was going on since long. He submits that prior to lodging of the present case, from petitioners side, an F.I.R. against the informant side vide Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No.20 of 2017 for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 307, 354, 379 /34 of the Indian Penal Code was lodged on 23.01.2017. However, on the next date, present F.I.R. was lodged by the informant and entire family members of petitioners were made accused. He submits that there was case and counter case in between the parties and, as such, petitioners deserve to be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.
However, in paragraph-3 of the petition, it has been indicated that petitioner nos.1 to 4 are accused in other case also. Considering the fact that petitioner nos. 1 to 4 are having criminal antecedent as well as the allegation made in the F.I.R., it is not a fit case for extending the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner nos. 1 to 4, namely, (i) Pappu Singh @ Pappu Kumar (ii) Tejnarayan Singh (iii) Sujeet Singh and ( iv) Devnarayan Singh stands rejected. However, it is observed that if within six weeks from today petitioner nos. 1 to 4 appear before the court below and make a prayer for regular bail, the learned court below without being prejudiced with this order may examine the same and pass
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21831 of 2017 (4) dt.19-07-2017 3/3 appropriate order in accordance with law preferably on the same day.
So far as petitioner nos.5 and 6 are concerned, considering the fact that petitioner nos.5 and 6 are lady and having clean antecedent, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for extending the privilege of anticipatory bail. Let (i) petitioner no.5, namely, Sona Devi and (ii) petitioner no.6, namely, Reena Devi , in the event of their arrest or surrender within six weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dalsingsarai, Samastipur in connection with Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No.24 of 2017, subject to condition as laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U T