Upendra Mahto And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.6619 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -77 Year- 2016 Thana -MANSURCHAK District- BEGUSARAI ======================================================
1. Upendra Mahto, S/o Shivji Mahto,
2. Rajaram Roy S/o Late Ram Udgar Roy, Both R/o Village- Satha Chakka, P.S.- Mansoorchak, District- Begusarai.
3. Ramesh Mahto @ Ramesh Kumar Mahto S/o Late Shiyaram Mahto, R/o Village- Oriyama, P.S.- Dalsingsarai, District- Samastipur. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Randhir Kumar No-1 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Sahin Begam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02/ 06-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 447, 435, 379, 427 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution case as per the written report of Ram Pukar Mahto dated 23.12.2016 submitted to the Station House Officer of Mansoorchak Police Station is
to the effect that the informant went to the nearby village for some personal work, in the meantime, the bundles of the Dhaincha kept on the land of the informant, was being carried away on a tractor on the order of Ram Sewak Rai by petitioner no. 1, Upendra Mahto, petitioner no. 2, Rajaram Roy, petitioner no. 3, Ramesh Mahto, co-accused Jiwan Prakash Mahto, Sanjay Rai, Manjay and Opendra Mahto. On protest being made by the sons of the informant namely, Rakesh Kumar and Santosh Kumar, the co-accused Sanjay Rai and Manjay Rai assaulted them. When the informant reached, he was assaulted by Ramsewak Rai and Jiwan Prakash Mahto by the butt of the pistol on the nose and hand, causing bleeding injury on the nose and they also tried to throttle the informant by noosing the towel around the neck, but some villagers came and saved the informant.
It is alleged that petitioner no. 3, Ramesh Mahto snatched Samsung mobile and petitioner no. 2, Rajaram Roy set the bundles of Dhaincha on fire. It is further alleged that Upendra Mahto, Rajaram Roy, Ram Sewak Roy, Ramesh Mahto and Jiwan Prakash Mahto cut away the Gamhar and Neem tree.
It is submitted by learned counsel for
the petitioners that the accusation has been levelled in the background of land dispute. There is a counter version of the occurrence also being Mansoorchak P.S. Case No. 46 of 2015 with accusation under Sections 341, 323 and 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the informant side. Petitioner no. 3 is not having any criminal antecedent and petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are accused in one other case but they are on bail, while the same has also been lodged by the informant of the present case. It is further submitted that no substantial injury has been caused to the informant or his sons.
Learned APP submits that there is accusation of assault against the petitioners also. Considering the nature of accusation in the background of land dispute and the counter version of the occurrence, let the above named petitioners be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Begusarai in connection with Mansoorchak P.S. Case
No. 77 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) DKS/- U T