Patna High CourtCR. MISC./22808/2017rejected

Khush Mohammad Mian And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2017-08-25Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.22808 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -474 Year- 2016 Thana -SIKARPUR DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ======================================================

1. Khush Mohammad Mian

2. Noor Mohammad Mian Both Sons of Doma Mian resident of VillageMangarahari, Police station- Shikarpur, District- West Champaran. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramchandra Sahani ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 25-08-2017 Heard leaned counsel for the petitioners and the leaned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 474 of 2016, registered under Sections 341, 323, 308 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran.

The accusation is that on 04.11.2016 at 10.00 A.M., the informant Rehana Khatoon was engaged in cutting grass in the field. At that time, petitioners along with other named in the F.I.R. came and started to collect the grass and wrapped it with rope. When informant made protest then she was assaulted by

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.22808 of 2017 (3) dt.25-08-2017 2/2 them causing injury at her head and left leg. When Haidar Ansari came for help then he was also assaulted by them. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it would appear from the F.I.R. that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners and his father to cause injury to the informant and his son, but only two injuries are grievous in nature.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioners, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioners are directed to surrender before the trail Court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial Court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T