Raj Kishor Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32485 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-381 Year-2020 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Raj Kishor Ray, aged about 45 years, male, Son of Late Lakhandeo Ray. 2.
Nitu Ray, aged about 27 years, male, Son of Rajendra Ray. 3.
Ranjit Ray, aged about 44 years, male, Son of Late Sakaldeo Ray. 4.
Surendra Ray @ Somintar Ray, aged about 60 years, male, Son of Late Kapildev Rai, 5.
Naval Ray, aged about 42 years, male, Son of Surendra Ray. All are resident of Village - Singhara Bujurg (Tanra), P.S. - Mahua, District - Vaishali at Hajipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Narendra Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-02-2021 Heard Mr. Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, learned APP for the State.
Mr. Narendra Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this application with
2/4 respect to petitioner No. 3/Ranjit Ray as he has been arrested.
The application with respect to petitioner No. 3 is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Petitioner Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 381 of 2020, dated 04.07.2020, instituted for the offences under Sections 147, 385, 387, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is alleged in the F.I.R. that eighteen acres of land had been purchased by one Vaishali Industrial Park Private Ltd., Patna. When the Director of the Company along with his employees was trying to make an estimate of the expenses over the said land, a rangdari amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- was put up by the accused persons including the petitioners and the informant was threatened of dire consequences, in case the protection money was not paid to them.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that an absolute false and concocted case has been alleged
3/4 by the informant. In fact, the entire body of the villagers were up in arms against the Director of the company for the reason that he had taken land from the farmers on the assurance of giving them good price of the land and accommodating two of the villagers in employment of the firm. Neither of the promises were fulfilled by the Director of the company. It was precisely for this reason that the villagers were staging protest against construction of any building over the said plots of land.
With respect to the aforesaid act of duping the villagers, some of the villagers had approached the concerned administrative authorities for redressal of their grievances.
Considering the aforesaid background facts, petitioner Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5, viz., Raj Kishor Ray, Nitu Ray, Surendra Ray @ Somintar Ray and Naval Ray, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of eight weeks, are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount
4/4 each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 381 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Praveen-II/- U T