Bhunu Bin @ Bhunnu Bin v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25995 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-592 Year-2024 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Bhunu Bin @ Bhunnu Bin S/o Late Sukhdev Bin R/o Rani Pakdi Tola, Dhurauwa, P.S.- Bettiah Muffasil, District- West Champaran 2.
Ragni Kumari D/o Bhunu Bin @ Bhunnu Bin R/o Rani Pakdi Tola, Dhurauwa, P.S.- Bettiah Muffasil, District- West Champaran 3.
Sudhir Kumar S/o Lattha Bin @ Latha Bin R/o Rani Pakdi Tola, Dhurauwa, P.S.- Bettiah Muffasil, District- West Champaran 4.
Basanti Devi W/o Bhunu Bin @ Bhunnu Bin R/o Rani Pakdi Tola, Dhurauwa, P.S.- Bettiah Muffasil, District- West Champaran 5.
Sandeep Bin @ Sandeep Kumar S/o Bhunu Bin @ Bhunnu bin R/o Rani Pakdi Tola, Dhurauwa, P.S.- Bettiah Muffasil, District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Abhay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 15-05-2025 Heard Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 592 of 2024 for the offence under sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 303(2), 109(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita lodged on 03.11.2024 by the informant, Jitendra Ray.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that he had gone to the house of petitioner no. 1, Bhunu Bin
2/4 demanding money which was pending with him. In return, he was abused and upon protest, allegation is that the accused persons assaulted him which include iron rod blow by Sandeep Bin which hit his head and fell on the ground, as Chhotelal came to the rescue, he was also assaulted over his left eye. Jogendra Bin was also assaulted by Sudhir Bin while Krishna Devi and Lalwati Devi were assaulted by the female family members. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that exaggerated FIR is there, the injury on Jitendra Rai (the informant) has been found to be simple in nature. There is no other injury report with regard to the other family members of the informant as find incorporated in the FIR. They being known to each other have come to a mutual settlement and they have no criminal antecedent. Further, the last submission is that without accepting the allegation and/or the outcome of the present petition in view of the fact that the informant's side has alleged injuries, the petitioners on their own would like to jointly contribute Rs. 15,000/- towards the medical assistance of the informant through Demand Draft issued by the local State Bank of India branch to be submitted before the 'NAZARAT' of concerned Court to be handed over to the informant after
3/4 checking the credentials.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that allegation of assault is on all the family members including the petitioner no. 1.
6. Though the allegation is there, the injury has been found to be simple in nature and they do not have any criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions subject to payment of Rs. 15,000/- as undertaken by the learned counsel for the petitioner to be paid by Demand Draft of local State Bank of India to be submitted to the Trial Court.
7. However, if it is found that the injury of any others has been found grievous and any of the petitioners herein have criminal antecedent, the present order shall become infructuous.
8. Let the petitioners be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 592 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
4/4 (i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioners who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioners shall appear before the concerned police station every fortnight for next six months to mark their attendance;
(iv) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioners shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U T