Ramsevak Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48338 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2021 Thana- MUFFASIL District- Aurangabad ====================================================== 1.

RAMSEVAK RAM S/o LATE SHIVBHAJAN RAM R/o VILLAGEKUNDA TOLA, MAHAVIR BIGHA, P.S-AURANGABAD MUFFASIL, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD.

2.

RAHUL KUMAR S/o RAMSEVAK RAM R/o VILLAGE-KUNDA TOLA, MAHAVIR BIGHA, P.S-AURANGABAD MUFFASIL, DISTRICTAURANGABAD. 3.

BABLU RAM @ BABLU KUMAR S/o RAMSEVAK RAM R/o VILLAGE-KUNDA TOLA, MAHAVIR BIGHA, P.S-AURANGABAD MUFFASIL, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pramendra Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 08-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under sections 174, 149, 341, 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code to which section 307 of the Indian Penal Code was added subsequently. As per the prosecution case, it is stated that accused persons including the three petitioners herein came variously armed and assaulted the informant and his family members. Further allegation of assault on the wife and daughter of the informant has been made against petitioner no.2, Rahul Kumar. It is submitted by learned counsel for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48338 of 2021(3) dt.08-03-2022 2/2 petitioners that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case over a trivial dispute which would be evident from the FIR itself. The allegations are general and omnibus in nature. The petitioners are in custody since 16.6.2021 and have no criminal antecedent. Chargesheet has been submitted in the case.

Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material that has transpired in course of investigation specially the injury reports of the wife and daughter of the informant, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on. 2 on bail and his application is rejected.

Liberty is granted to the petitioner no.2 to renew his prayer for bail on completing one year in custody. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court directs the petitioner no.1 and petitioner no. 3 to be enlarged on bail in connection with Mufassil Aurangabad P.S. Case no. 116 of 2021 on each of them furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Aurangabad. Bibhash/- (Partha Sarthy, J) U