Rahul Kumar @ Rahul v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.960 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2020 Thana- SHAMBHUGANJ District- Banka ====================================================== 1.

RAHUL KUMAR @ RAHUL Son of Raj Kumar Sah, Resident of VillageMirzapur, P.S.- Shambhuganj, District- Banka. 2.

Ankit Kumar Son of Nandu Sah, Resident of Village- Mirzapur, P.S.- Shambhuganj, District- Banka.

3.

Radha Devi Wife of Raj Kumar Sah, Resident of Village- Mirzapur, P.S.- Shambhuganj, District- Banka.

4.

Krishna Devi Wife of Nityanand Sah, Resident of Village- Mirzapur, P.S.- Shambhuganj, District- Banka.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pankaj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 29-10-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State through video conferencing. Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month.

In this case, the petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Shambhuganj P.S. Case No. 41 of 2020 registered for offence punishable under sections 147, 341, 323, 354(B), 386, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. As per allegation, co-accused persons have put a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.960 of 2021(2) dt.29-10-2021 2/3 Gumti in front of the house of the informant. The Anchal Amin, in presence of the villagers, conducted the measurement of the land and thereafter it was found that the Gumti was placed after encroachment of the land. Accordingly, the District Administration directed the accused persons to remove the Gumti. The accused persons demanded Rs.2,00,000/- in lieu of removal of the Gumti. It is further alleged that on 19th February 2020, the accused persons started erecting wall on the disputed land and also threatened the family members of the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that admittedly there is dispute in respect of encroachment.

He has further submitted that there is nothing in the FIR which shows that the accused persons assaulted or committed any type of atrocities on the member of the informant. He has also submitted that the petitioner nos. 3 and 4 are ladies. The First Information Report shows itself that as per allegation, the accused persons have forcibly raised wall, but there is nothing in the FIR which shows that any scuffle or marpit has taken place.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.960 of 2021(2) dt.29-10-2021 3/3 bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Shambhuganj P.S. Case No. 41 of 2020, subject to condition as laid down under section 438(2) Cr. P.C.

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the appellants within the stipulated time mentioned in paragraph 2 hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey , J) Mahesh/- U T