Lal Babu Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29135 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2020 Thana- KARAMCHAT District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== 1.
Lal Babu Ram, Son of Baleshar Ram, Resident of Village- Bhitari Bandh, P.S.- Karamchat, District- Kaimur at Bhabua.
2.
Sudama Ram, Son of Ram Janam Ram, Resident of Village- Bhitari Bandh, P.S.- Karamchat, District- Kaimur at Bhabua.
3.
Mundrika Ram, Son of Ram Janam Ram, Resident of Village- Bhitari Bandh, P.S.- Karamchat, District- Kaimur at Bhabua. 4.
Sugriv Ram, Son of Kanhai Ram, Resident of Village- Bhitari Bandh, P.S.- Karamchat, District- Kaimur at Bhabua.
5.
Devmuni Ram, Son of Hari Ram, Resident of Village- Bhitari Bandh, P.S.- Karamchat, District- Kaimur at Bhabua.
6.
Ramesh Ram, Son of Doma Ram, Resident of Village- Bhitari Bandh, P.S.- Karamchat, District- Kaimur at Bhabua.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties through Video Conferencing.
Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution case, the petitioners are alleged to have assaulted the informant with Lathi, Danda and Gadasa, as a result of which, he sustained injuries. Petitioners are also alleged to have pelted stones.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29135 of 2020(3) dt.05-01-2021 2/2 It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that there is case and counter case. It is further submitted that both sides received injury and injury is found to be simple in nature. So far as, these petitioners are concerned, there is no specific allegation against them. Petitioners have got clean antecedent as stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail petition. However, learned A.P.P. for State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, prayer for bail of the petitioners is allowed. In the event of arrest/surrender, let the petitioners, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabua in Karamchat Police Station Case No.25 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Ankit/- U T