Rahul Kumar Rai @ Rahul Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31960 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2020 Thana- BHAIRAVSHTHAN District- Madhubani ====================================================== JAGDISH RAY Son of Late Lakshmidatt Ray Resident of Village - Narayanpur, P.S.- Bhairave Asthan, Distt.- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Jha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 06-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under sections 302, 307 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, over a dispute between the parties it is stated that the eleven named accused persons were called and thereafter on the orders of the accused Ramdeo Rai, Rambalak Rai armed with farsa, Rahul Rai with dabia and Janak Lal Rai with an axe brutally assaulted the father of the informant as a result of which he was seriously injured and fell on the ground.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. No

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31960 of 2021(2) dt.06-01-2022 2/2 such occurrence as alleged has taken place. Even as per the FIR the specific allegations are against three other accused persons and not the petitioner herein. The postmortem report does not support the allegations leveled in the FIR. The petitioner is in custody since 25.1.2021 and has no criminal antecedent. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant who submits that besides being named in the FIR, there is allegation against the petitioner as well.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case including the petitioner having remained in custody for over 11 months and charge sheet having been submitted in the case, the Court directs the petitioner to be enlarged on bail in connection with G.R. Case no. 657 of 2020 (arising out of Bhairavsthan P.S. Case no. 59 of 2020) on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhanjharpur (Madhubani).

(Partha Sarthy, J) Prakash/- U