Gulab Chand Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27157 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2019 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria ====================================================== 1.

Gulab Chand Sharma, aged 35 years (Male), Son of Kushumlal Sharma 2.

Satya Narayan Sharma aged 45 years (Male), Son of Late Mohan Sharma 3.

Ramdeo Sharma aged 35 years (Male), son of Late Mohan Sharma 4.

Pradip Sharma aged 25 years (Male), Son of Laxman Sharma 5.

Dilip Sharma, aged 18 years (Male), Son of Ramdeo Sharma 6.

Subhash Sharfma @ Subhash Sharma aged 35 years (Male), Son of Ramdeo Sharma 7.

Mukesh Sharma aged 22 years (Male), Son of Stya Narayan Sharma 8.

Ranjit Sharma aged 20 years (Male), Son of Gulab Chand Sharma 9.

Kuldeo Sharma aged 50 years (Male), Son of Late Mohan Sharma 10.

Sushil Sharma aged 22 years (Male), Son of Kuldeo Sharma 11.

Rajesh Sharma aged 35 years (Male), Son of Late Raghuni Sharma All are resident of Village - Sukaila, Ward No. 10, P.S. - Bhargama, District Araria ... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners :

Mr.Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr.Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 25-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 324, 354B, 379, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 30 of 2019.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the backdrop of land dispute and there is case and counter case between the parties. The accusation of assault against the petitioners is general and omnibus in nature. The parties are family members of the informant. The specific accusation alleging

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27157 of 2019(2) dt.25-04-2019 2/2 the offence under Section 354B of the IPC has falsely been made against the petitioner no. 11 alone but this is denied as being superaddition as is the accusation for the offence under Section 379 of the IPC. The petitioners claim clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioners' arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria in connection with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 30 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. and with further conditions -- (i) That one of the bailors of each of the petitioners shall be their close relatives.

(ii) That the petitioners shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(iii) That the petitioners shall remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. (iv) That the petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make themselves available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. BT/- (Vikash Jain, J) U T