Mrityunjay Singh @ Mithun @ Mrityunjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36071 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-599 Year-2023 Thana- KUCHAIKOTE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Mrityunjay Singh @ Mithun @ Mrityunjay Kumar S/o- Rameshwar Singh R/o- Karmaini Ghazi Ps- Kuchaikote Dist- Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Deepankar Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Vyas Kumar Mishra, ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 05-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.

02. In the present case, the petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 599 of 2023, registered on 08.12.2023 for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

03. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along with co-accused persons tried to snatch the keys of motorcycle of the son of the informant on gun point and when he opposed their act, the petitioner assaulted him thrice in his abdomen with knife causing bleeding and injuries. Thereafter, the co-accused Rameshwar Rai, who is father of the petitioner, instead of stopping his son also gave knife blows to the son of the informant causing three injuries in his left hand.

04. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

2/4 petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The present case is completely false and concocted. There is no eye witness to the occurrence and from the F.I.R. it also appears that informant has also not seen the occurrence. Due to rivalry between two families the informant has lodged the present case. The case has been registered after ten days from the date of occurrence, this creates doubt over the prosecution case. The F.I.R. does not show any reasons for the occurrence. Learned counsel further submits the son of the informant is a criminal and he might have received the injuries in a state of intoxication and fight with unknown persons. Moreover, the injury report shows that the injuries are simple in nature though caused by a sharp cutting weapon.

Learned counsel further submits that the allegation against the petitioner is of giving knife blows in the abdomen of the son of the informant but as per injury report only three skin deep injuries of superficial dimensions were found, which falsifies the allegation against the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner has been made accused in two cases in which he is on bail.

05. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently oppose the submission

3/4 made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he gave knife blows in the abdomen of son of the informant. Though injuries are stated to be simple but all are caused by sharp cutting weapon.

06. Having regard to the fact and circumstances and submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the non-serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and further considering the simple nature of injuries which are all having small dimensions, let the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court concerned within a period of eight weeks from today, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M-I, Gopalganj in connection with Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 599 of 2023, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the code of Criminal Procedure and other following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the below, if

4/4 so required by the learned trial court.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) Ashish/- U T