Baidiujama @ Sattu @ Badiujama v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44521 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2020 Thana- RAHIKA District- Madhubani ====================================================== BAIDIUJAMA @ SATTU @ BADIUJAMA Son of Late Abdul Hamid Resident of village - Suganna, P.S. - Rahika, Distt. - Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Prakash For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Mushtaque Alam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 28-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 324, 325, 326, 380, 341, 342, 504 and 506 of the IPC.

3. As per prosecution case, the petitioner along with other accused persons have allegedly assaulted the informant and his brother.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case due to political rivalry. He has committed no offence. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner and no specific overt act against him. The present case is counterblast to Rahika P.S. Case No. 60 of 2020 under Sections 341, 448, 323, 324,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44521 of 2023(2) dt.28-07-2023 2/2 354B, 379, 506/34 of the IPC lodged by the co-accused Md. Kamran. He further submitted that the injury reports are collusive and have been prepared by the informant with the help of a private hospital. The others co-accused have already been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench vide orders dated 21.12.2022/14.12.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 54501 of 2022/51607 of 2022. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition. He is languishing in judicial custody since 16.04.2023.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below in connection with Rahika P.S. Case No. 61 of 2020.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) arish/- U T