Dinay Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34927 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-230 Year-2022 Thana- JANTA BAZAR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Dinay Ray Son Of Surendra Rai Resident Of Village- Panditpur, Ps- Janta Bazar, Distt- Saran At Chapra 2.
Manjit Yadav @ Manjit Kumar Son Of Tuntun Yadav Resident Of VillagePanditpur, Ps- Janta Bazar, Distt- Saran At Chapra 3.
Vishal Yadav @ Vishal Kumar Son Of Tuntun Yadav Resident Of VillagePanditpur, Ps- Janta Bazar, Distt- Saran At Chapra 4.
Sanjay Ray @ Sanjay Kumar Son Of Harihar Rai Resident Of VillagePanditpur, Ps- Janta Bazar, Distt- Saran At Chapra 5.
Vinay Rai Son Of Surendra Rai Resident Of Village- Panditpur, Ps- Janta Bazar, Distt- Saran At Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ayush Kumar, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Murli Dhar, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-07-2023 Heard Mr. Ayush Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Janta Bazar P.S. Case No.230 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 341, 342, 323, 307, 384, 387, 427, 379, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. It is alleged that all the petitioners intercepted the truck laden with sand and demanded a ransom money of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34927 of 2023(3) dt.25-07-2023 2/3 Rs.20,000/- for smooth passage of the truck. Upon the aforenoted information, when the informant reached at the place of occurrence the petitioner no.2 allegedly fired upon him but the bullet did not hit him. It is further alleged that all the petitioners have also damaged the Scorpio vehicle of the informant and snatched valuables.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that petitioner nos.1, 2 3 and 5 are students and they have been pursuing their studies in different institutions and in support of the aforesaid averments academic certificates have been brought on record by way of Annexures 3, 4 and 5. He next submits that even as per FIR neither the ransom amount has been handed-over to anyone nor the informant or any person has sustained injury. He also submits that in fact no such occurrence has taken place but as the informant looking into the public affairs of the Block at the behest of Block Pramukh certain objection have been made by the petitioners which resulted into lodging of this case. He next submit that the petitioners have absolutely fair antecedent.
5. On the other hand learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that specific allegations have been leveled against the petitioners that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34927 of 2023(3) dt.25-07-2023 3/3 they damaged the vehicle of the informant and also made firing but unfortunately the same did not hit anyone.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner nos.1, 2, 3 and 5 are students and as such sending them behind the bar would certainly jeopardize their career, coupled with their fair antecedent, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Chapra in connection with Janta Bazar P.S. Case No.230 of 2022, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners. (Harish Kumar, J) Manoj/- U T