Patna High CourtCR. MISC./42219/2014dismissed

Manoj Mandal And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2015-04-30Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 42219 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -57 Year- 2014 Thana -KURSELA District- KATIHAR ======================================================

1. Manoj Mandal, Son of Jagdish Mandal.

2. Anoj Mandal Son of Jagdish Mandal R/o - Village - Kheriya Mandal Tola, P.S.- Kursela, District- Katihar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 30-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend arrest in Kursela P.S. Case No. 57 of 2014 dated 02.05.2014 instituted under Sections 448/341/323/307/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the allegation the petitioners are said to have given dagger blow and spear blow on two persons. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on the basis of record the land on which the occurrence took place belongs to the petitioners and the informant and others were trying to forcibly take possession of the same for which prior to lodging of the F.I.R. a proceeding under Section 107 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 had been initiated which clearly indicates that the other side was the aggressor. It is further submitted that the injury suffered are

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42219 of 2014 (4) dt.30-04-2015 2/2 simple in nature and the petitioners have clean antecedent. Learned A.P.P.

opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that there is allegation of assault of dagger and spear against the petitioners and two persons received injuries which are incised wound caused by sharp weapon.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail.

The application, accordingly, stands dismissed. However, in the event the petitioners surrender and pray for regular bail before the Court below, the same shall be considered on its own merits in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the present order. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) Anand Kr.

U T