Munna Ram @ Munna Kumar @ Munna Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25277 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-592 Year-2024 Thana- GHOSI District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.
Munna Ram @ Munna Kumar @ Munna Kumar Singh son of Logen Ram 2.
Ranjan Ram @ Rajan Kumar son of Logen Ram All R/o village- Ahiyasa P.S- Ghosi Dist- Jahenabab ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Eashita Raj, Advocate : Mr.Anuj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard Ms. Eashita Raj, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Rabindra Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Ghosi P.S. Case No. 592 of 2024, FIR dated 09.12.2024 for the offence registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 74, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the prosecution story, the petitioners with bad intention entered the house of the informant. Upon objection, he called his family members, abused and assaulted which caused injury to the informant's sister-in-law and also tried to outrage the modesty of her daughter. When she tried to call the Police, allegation against one Sonu Kumar is of
2/4 snatching the mobile.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. Although the petitioners are named in the FIR but from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is specific allegation of assault attributed against petitioner No.1, namely, Munna Ram @ Munna Kumar @ Munna Kumar Singh that he has assaulted the sister-in-law of the informant by means of brick and she has received the injury as per allegation against petitioner No.2 is concerned there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt-act attributed against him. Although sister-in-law of the informant received the injury but the injury report of the sister-in-law of the informant suggests that the injury is simple in nature and apart from that, co-accused person, namely, Uttaam Kumar has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 07.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.25455 of 2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioners have
3/4 clean antecedent, injury inflicted upon the injured person is simple in nature and the co-accused person has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten Thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad in connection with Ghosi P.S. Case No.
592 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:- (I) Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at
4/4 any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T