Ram Kumar Pandey And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.25411 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -110 Year- 2016 Thana -SURYAPURA District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================
1. Ram Kumar Pandey, Son of Late Thakur Pandey,
2. Gupteshwer Paswan, Son of Late Bhadeya Ram, Both are R/o Village- Suryapura, P.O.+P.S.- Suryapura, District- Rohatas,
3. Munna Pandey, Son of Siya Raman Pandey @ Lalan Pandey.
4. Siya Raman Pandey @ Lalan Pandey @ Lalan, Late Suryanath Pandey.
5. Ramji Pandey @ Das Ji, Son of Late Sukhraj Pandey, 3 to 5 are R/o Village- Kharoj, P.S.- Suryapura, District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashutosh Tripathy For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhuranand Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-07-2017 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Suryapura Police Station Case No. 110 of 2016, disclosing offences under Sections 341/323/504/ 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
It is alleged that the petitioners, who have been named in the First Information Report, arrived at the paddy field of the informant and cut paddy crops and took them
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25411 of 2017 (2) dt.06-07-2017 2/3 away. They are said to have assaulted the informant also, on protest. The petitioner no. 1 is alleged to have given his rifle to petitioner no. 3, who opened fire, which could not hit anyone. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is apparently civil dispute between the parties, which is the reason behind the occurrence. On perusal of the petition, I find that petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 have criminal antecedent. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant them privilege of anticipatory bail. Their application for anticipatory bail is accordingly dismissed.
However, considering the nature of dispute between the parties, the Court expects that the learned Court below will make endeavor to dispose of the bail application of petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, on their surrender, preferably on the same day on its own merits, if they surrender within four weeks from today and apply for regular bail.
Considering the nature of dispute between the parties and the fact that petitioner no. 5, Ramji Pandey @ Das Ji, has no criminal antecedent, this application, so far as it relates to petitioner no. 5, is allowed. Let the petitioner no. 5, Ramji Pandey @ Das Ji, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25411 of 2017 (2) dt.06-07-2017 3/3 below within six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas, in connection with Suryapura Police Station Case No. 110 of 2016, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438
(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
This is subject to the condition that the petitioner no.
shall present himself before the police/Court, as the case may be, as and when required and in the event of failure on his part to appear before the Court on two consecutive occasions, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √