Yogendra Thakur And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.35306 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -168 Year- 2017 Thana -PARWATTA District- KHAGARIA ======================================================

1. Yogendra Thakur, S/o Late Manni Thakur.

2. Binita Devi, W/o Yogendra Thakur. Both are resident of VillageKharagpura, P.S.- Parbatta, District- Khagaria. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umeshnand Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 02-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioners seek bail in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 168 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 326(A) and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case, as lodged by the informant, is that on 16.05.2017 about 1:30 hour two unknown persons came at his house and called him to the house of Manjula Devi on the pretext to sign on the compromise petition where the petitioners along with co-accused Manjula Devi and Bikash Thakur were present, who called him inside the house and on the direction of the petitioner no.1, Yogendra Thakur, co-accused Manjula Devi

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35306 of 2017 (2) dt.02-08-2017 2/3 threw acid upon his mouth, as a result of which he sustained burn injury.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that they are innocent, bear no criminal antecedent and have been falsely implicated. In fact, the allegation of sprinkling acid is upon accused Manjula Devi and just because it was in the house of the co-accused Manjula Devi and are husband and wife, they have been made accused. It has further been submitted that both the parties are on inimical terms and Parbatta P.S. Case No. 159 of 2016 and Complaint Case No. 824C of 2016 have been filed by the petitioners' side against the informant's side. He submits that as per the injury report, injury on the informant has been found to be simple in nature.

However, learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, let the petitioners, named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 168 of 2017, subject to the condition

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35306 of 2017 (2) dt.02-08-2017 3/3 that both the bailors would be close relative of the petitioners having sufficient immovable properties within the jurisdiction of the concerned P.S./ Court, who would file an affidavit stating their relationship with the petitioners.

(Nilu Agrawal, J.) Arjun/- U T