Punam Devi @ Punam Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39810 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2024 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger ====================================================== 1.

Punam Devi @ Punam Kumari, Daughter Of Diwakar Yadav Resident Of Village - Bank, P.S. - Munger Muffasil, District - Munger 2.

Babulal Yadav @ Babulal Kumar, Son Of Kailash Yadav Resident Of Village - Bank, P.S. - Munger Muffasil, District - Munger 3.

Kailash Yadav, Son Of Late Bhim Yadav Resident Of Village - Bank, P.S. - Munger Muffasil, District - Munger 4.

Ruby Devi @ Smita Kumari, Wife Of Pankaj Kumar Resident Of Village - Bank, P.S. - Munger Muffasil, District - Munger ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravish Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Pronoti Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-07-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 337, 307, 354, 379, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners nos.1, 3 and 4 have antecedent of one case and petitioner no.2 is person with clean antecedent and petitioner nos.1 and 4 are women and the informant alleges that accused

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39810 of 2024(3) dt.20-07-2024 2/3 persons including the petitioners came to his house variously armed and Pankaj assaulted the informant by rod causing injury on head. Further, when his wife and son came to save him, they were also assaulted by the accused persons and Pankaj and Rubi torn the sari of his wife.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case being agnates of Pankaj. It is also submitted that informant and the petitioners are related, but then, the informant concealing the relationship has instituted the instant case giving an impression that a criminal had entered the house and committed the occurrence. It is further submitted that no doubt, the informant received injury, but one injury is grievous and all the other injuries are simple in nature. It is next submitted that even wife of the informant suffered injuries, which is simple in nature. It is next submitted that specific allegation of assaulting the informant is against Pankaj and as far as allegation of assault against these petitioners are concerned, the same is general and omnibus in nature.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39810 of 2024(3) dt.20-07-2024 3/3 counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum 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, Munger in connection with Munger Muffasil P. S. Case No.116 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T