Ravindra Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35091 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2020 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== RAVINDRA SAH Son of Late Ram Pragas Sah Resident of Village Rajbara, P.S. - Sonbarsa, District - Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Hans Lal Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-06-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 504, 506, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 15.08.2020, when he was sitting at his door, coaccused Sushil Kumar threw fish washed water on his body which resulted in hot exchange of words between the two, it is next alleged that thereafter the accused persons including the petitioner armed with sword, danda and knife came and assaulted the informant and his family members and injured them, further petitioner assaulted the informant by knife on his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35091 of 2021(2) dt.13-06-2022 2/3 head.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner in the F.I.R. that he assaulted the informant by knife on his head but from perusal of the injury report it would manifest that the Doctors found lacerated wound on the left side of toe of thumb of the informant which was simple in nature caused by hard and blunt substance, learned counsel thus submits that this amply demonstrates that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but is not able to meet the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that injury report does not even remotely corroborate the prosecution case. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Sonbarsa

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35091 of 2021(2) dt.13-06-2022 3/3 P.S. Case No. 151 of 2020 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T