Tajikan Rai @ Sabal Rai @ Tanik Rai @ Tanuk Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25255 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-225 Year-2018 Thana- SALIMPUR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

TAJIKAN RAI @ SABAL RAI @ TANIK RAI @ TANUK RAI Son of Late Ramdev Rai Resident of Village- Hidayatpur Road, P.S.- Salimpur, Distt- Patna.

2.

Uma Devi @ Usha Devi Wife of Sabal Rai Resident of Village- Hidayatpur, Road, P.S.- Salimpur, Distt- Patna.

3.

Praduman Yadav Son of Sabal Yadav @ Tanik Rai Resident of VillageHidayatpur Road, P.S.- Salimpur, Distt- Patna. 4.

Munchun Yadav Son of Sabal Yadav @ Tanik Rai Resident of VillageHidayatpur Road, P.S.- Salimpur, Distt- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gyanendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 24-11-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State through video conference. Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes that all defects pointed out by the stamp reporter shall be removed, and compliance with the conditions of the notices of this Court with regard to acceptance of e-filing shall be made, without delay immediately upon resumption of normal physical functioning of the Court, and in any event within one month thereof.

2. The petitioners apprehends their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 307, 354, 379, 448

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25255 of 2020(3) dt.24-11-2020 2/3 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in connection with Salimpur P.S. Case No. 225 of 2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated on the accusation of committing assault on the informant with fists, slaps, lathi and iron rod resulting in injury on her head, and also beating the informant's grandmother. It is submitted that the accusations of assault are general and omnibus in nature and no specific injury has been assigned individually. There is case and counter case between the parties. The injury report initially disclosed lacerated wound on the head which was scalp deep, but thereafter by a supplementary report the injury was shown to be grievous. The petitioners claim clean antecedents.

4. Learned APP appears and has been heard.

5. Considering the nature of accusations, gravity of the offence alleged and the grievous injury suffered by the informant, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The petition stands dismissed.

6. If the petitioners surrender and seek regular bail before the learned court below, the same shall be considered on its own merit in accordance with law, without being prejudiced

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25255 of 2020(3) dt.24-11-2020 3/3 by any observation in the present order.

7. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioners within the stipulated time provided in para 1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) HR/- U T