Amit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40511 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2020 Thana- VIDYAPATINAGAR DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== Amit Kumar, Son of Shambhu Rai Resident of Village - Dhanirampur Kancha, P.S.- Ghatho, District - Samastipur (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shama Sinha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Amit Kumar Rakesh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 22-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Vidyapatinagar P.S. Case No.190 of 2020 registered for the offence under Sections 147,307,323,341,354,379,447,504,506 of the IPC.

Prosecution case in short is that, when the informant was at home, the petitioner and other co-accused persons were equipped with weapon and started abusing her. Informant opposed the act of accused persons, then petitioner caught hair of the informant. When son of the informant, namely, Mukesh Kumar came to save her then petitioner inflicted farsa blow on the head of the Mukesh of which his head was ruptured and he became unconscious. After that another son namely Rakesh

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40511 of 2021(2) dt.22-03-2022 2/3 Kumar came then all the accused persons started beating him with lathi and danda. Co-accused Vibha Devi and Rinku Devi snatched the golden Jitiya from the neck of the informant and co-accused Randhir Ram outraged the modesty of the informant.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that there is land dispute between the parties and there is case and counter case between them. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that injuries were sustained in course of self defence and are simple in nature. Petitioner has clean antecedent.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., IIIrd, Dalsinghsarai,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40511 of 2021(2) dt.22-03-2022 3/3 Samastipur in connection with Vidyapatinagar P.S. Case No.190 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Prakash Narayan /- U T