Kanti Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31396 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-546 Year-2020 Thana- HILSA District- Nalanda ====================================================== KANTI DEVI Wife of Suryamani Prasad Resident of Village - Pakariyabigha, P.S.- Hilsa, District - Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 18-02-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected to honour his undertaking given in the instant case for depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defect(s) as pointed out by the office when called upon to do so by the office. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 307, 313 and 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is a case of assault by means of pistol upon the informant and his wife by the accused persons. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that there is case and counter case between the parties and the FIR was lodged after seven days of the alleged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31396 of 2021(2) dt.18-02-2022 2/2 occurrence. He further submits that from perusal of injury report vide Annexure-2, it appears that the injured Mithilesh Kumar shows that no evidence of any obvious fracture on bone window, injured Renuka Devi, which also shows that no evidence of any obvious fracture on bone window. He further submits that there is some partition dispute due to which altercation took place between the parties, as a result of which both parties have received some injuries.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

In the 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 from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hilsa, Nalanda in connection with Hilsa P.S. Case No. 546 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) brajesh kumar/- U T