Krishna Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44243 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1340 Year-2013 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGaya ====================================================== 1.
Krishna Manjhi Son Of Sri Pun Manjhi Resident Of Village- Shripur, Bodhgaya, Ps- Bodhgaya, District- Gaya 2.
Sanjay Kumar Son Of Sri Musafir Yadav Resident Of Village- Baiju Bigha, Bodhgaya, Ps- Bodhgaya, District- Gaya 3.
Shakib Sahid @ Sakib Shahid Son Of Md. Shahid Resident Of VillageBodhgaya, Ps- Bodhgaya, District- Gaya 4.
Panna Devi Wife Of Sri Sunil Manjhi Resident Of Village- Sripur, Bodhgaya, Ps- Bodhgaya, District- Gaya 5.
Syed Mustaque Son Of Late Saiyad Mohmmad Resident Of Shivaji Nagar, Road No. 22-A-07, Govindi, Ps- Shivaji Nagar, District- Mumbai (MAHARASHTRA)- 400043 ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Mr. Hyeon Dong Hwa, Founder President Hankuk Budhist Society, Resident Of Greater Kailash 510, New Delhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Naresh Ray ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehends their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 120(B), 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the notices in the case was issued by an order dated 22.08.2023 and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44243 of 2023(3) dt.30-04-2024 2/3 the notices were filed in time but from perusal of the office report dated 25.04.2024, it would manifest that the same records with respect to undelivered registered cover notice that the postal peon has reported that there is no such persons.
4. Be that as it may, in the nature of allegation as alleged in the complaint case, the court proceeds to decide the case on merits.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were witnesses in the case filed by Lalan Yadav against the present complainant, being Bodhgaya P.S. Case No.54/2013. It is next submitted that since the petitioners were witnesses in the case of Lalan Yadav against the complainant, as such, instant complaint case came to be instituted by the complainant, in order to coerce the petitioners into submission, when petitioners are persons with clean antecedent. It is also submitted that petitioners will not abscond rather will co-operate in the trial.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44243 of 2023(3) dt.30-04-2024 3/3 within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Complaint Case No.1340/2013, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U