Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52453 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2022 Thana- NIMCHAKBATHANI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Pintu Kumar Son of Arvind Prasad R/o Village-Madho Bigha, P.S.- Neemchakbathani, District- Gaya, Bihar 2.

Ravindra Kumar @ Devendra Nath Tagore Son of Arvind Prasad R/o Village-Madho Bigha, P.S.- Neemchakbathani, District- Gaya, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Sucheta Yadav, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 20-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioners along with other co-accused persons are said to have assaulted the father of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. They are quite innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is not specific rather

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52453 of 2024(3) dt.20-09-2024 2/2 general and omnibus in nature. He submits that both parties are agnates and there was irrigational dispute between the parties. He further submits that though injury was found grievous in nature, but there is general and omnibus allegation. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent and have been languishing in custody since 16.05.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the bail petition and submitted that the petitioners are also involved in the present case and the injury was found grievous in nature.

6. Considering the facts aforesaid and the fact that the petitioners are in custody since 16.05.2024, the above named petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Neemchak Bathani P.S. Case No. 140 of 2022. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T