Bhola Yadav And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.9988 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2012 Thana- NABINAGAR District- Aurangabad ======================================================
1. Bhola Yadav son of Chalitra Yadav, resident of village-Surar, P.S. N.T.P.C. Khaira, District Aurangabad
2. Ashok Kumar Singh @ Ashok Kumar , son of Late Ram Naresh Singh, resident of village Khadaha, P.S .N.T.P.C. Khaira, District Aurangabad 3 Shyam Sundar Singh @ Shyam Sundar Chandrabanshi, son of Ram Chandra Singh Chandrabanshi, resident of village Pirouta, P.S .N.T.P.C. Khaira, District Aurangabad
4. Munchun Singh @ Saroj Kumar Singh @ Muchun Singh @ Saro Kumar Singh son of Ramashray Singh resident of village Kerka, P.S .N.T.P.C. Khaira, District Aurangabad
5. Santosh Yadav@ Deepak Kumar son of Ram Naresh Yadav Resident of village Dhundhua P.S. N.T.P.C. Khaira, District Aurangabad.
6. Surendra Yadav son of Kamdeo Yadav, resident of village Dhundhua, P.S. N.T.P.C. Khaira, District Aurangabad.
7. Santosh Kumar son of Rajendra Singh Resident of village Kerka,P.S. N.T.P.C. Khaira, District Aurangabad
8. Mangal Singh son of Ramashray Singh Resident of village Kerka P.S. N.T.P.C. Khaira,Dist. Aurangabad.
9. Dhirendra Kumar son of Ghura Chandrabanshi, Resident of village Khadaha, P.S. N.T.P.C. Khaira, Dist. Aurangabad.
10. Munna Singh @ Abinash Kumar son of Binod Singh, resident of village Khadaha, P.S. N.T.P.C. Khaira, Dist. Aurangabad.
11. Abhay Singh son of Amrendra Singh resident of village Kerka, P.S. N.T.P.C. Khaira, Dist. Aurangabad
12. Surendra Kumar Pal @ Surendra Pal, son of Ram Kewal Pal, Resident of village- Khadaha, P.S. N.T.P.C. Khaira, District Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. SRI BINOD KUMAR 3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 22-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
Petitioners apprehend their arrest in Nabinagar P.S. case
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9988 of 2018(2) dt.22-02-2018 2/3 no. 140 of 2012 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 147,148, 149, 341, 323, 337, 353, 332, 333,307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown. It is alleged in the written report that on the issue of grant of compensation for acquisition of the land 400 to 500 persons assembled near boiler of NTPC and assaulted the workers working in the boiler and also damaged the vehicles and other devices in the office. The police came but they also made firing and tried to burn the assets of the company.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that name of these petitioners has come during investigation of the case. From the written report itself it appears that there is general and omnibus allegation that the people have gathered at the boiler for demand of compensation money 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 Nabinagar P.S. case no. 140 of 2012, 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
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9988 of 2018(2) dt.22-02-2018 3/3 CJM, Aurangabad, 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 tamper 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.
(Sanjay Priya, J) shyambihari/- U T