Saroj Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48994 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2024 Thana- MANJHI District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Saroj Ray Son Of Shivnandan Ray Village- Panchpatra, Ps- Rivilganj, DistSaran 2.
Kameshwar Ray Son Of Shiv Kumar Ray Village- Panchpatra, PsRivilganj, Dist- Saran ... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Raushan Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 18-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioners seek bail in Manjhi P.S. case No. 135 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 323, 341, 307, 504, 34, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Prosecution allegation, in short, is that the accused persons, including the petitioners, variously armed, fired in air with their pistol and thereafter they also assaulted the nephew of the informant with sharp weapon due to which he sustained injury.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48994 of 2024(3) dt.18-09-2024 2/3 petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. General and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that out of two injuries, one injury is said to be simple while other, which is said to be caused by hard blunt substance, is grievous in nature. In the F.I.R., the injury is alleged to have caused by sharp weapon whereas from the injury report which is grievance in nature, the same is caused by hard blunt substance. Hence, the allegation made in F.I.R. does not corroborate with the injury report. The petitioners are in custody since 28.04.2024 and have no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners. Learned APP submits that specific allegation of firing and assault is alleged against the petitioner and considering the same, the petitioner do not deserve to be released on bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.
7. Let the petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48994 of 2024(3) dt.18-09-2024 3/3 below/concerned Court in connection with Manjhi P.S. case No. 135 of 2024.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Pankaj/- U T