Raj Kumar Rai And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29964 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -121 Year- 2013 Thana -BIBHUTIPUR District- SAMASTIPUR ======================================================

1. Raj Kumar Rai, son of late Shivan Rai,

2. Ram Sakal Rai, son of late Shivan Rai,

3. Shilvant Rai, son of Jank Rai, all residents at village- Kalyanpur, P.S.- Bibhutipur, Samastipur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jay Prakash Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 2/ 13-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and the State.

The Petitioners apprehend their arrest in Bibhutipur P.S. Case No.121 of 2013 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 353, 427 Indian Penal Code.

It appears that on account of road accident several persons have appeared and started assaulting the driver of the vehicles. The informant and other police party reached at the place of occurrence, but they were obstructed from going there. It is alleged that local persons and Chaukidar disclosed the name of these petitioners and other accused persons.

There is general and omnibus allegation against the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29964 of 2017 (2) dt.13-07-2017 2/2 petitioners.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer of the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioners, named above, within six weeks from today in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No.121 of 2013, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the ACJM IV, Rosera, Samastipur, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P. C.

with further conditions (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioners shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will automatically cancel bail bond of the petitioners and (3) if petitioners tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioners.