Aman Jha @ Aman Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51159 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-401 Year-2022 Thana- ROSERA District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.
AMAN JHA @ AMAN KUMAR JHA SON OF SHAMBHU JHA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE -NANDE NAGAR BALHA, PS- ROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR 2.
SHAMBHU JHA @ SHAMBHU KUMAR JHA SON OF LATE RAM SHARAN JHA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE -NANDE NAGAR BALHA, PSROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR 3.
MUKUL PATHAK @ MUKUL KUMAR PATHAK SON OF BIMLESH PATHAK RESIDENT OF VILLAGE -NANDE NAGAR BALHA, PSROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Abhimanyu Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 19-08-2023 1.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
2.
This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Rosera PS case no. 401 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 384 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code.
3.
At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners no. 1 and 2 have been arrested during the interregnum period, hence, the present petition qua the petitioners no. 1 and 2 has been rendered infructuous.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51159 of 2023(2) dt.19-08-2023 2/3 4.
Accordingly, the present petition qua the petitioners no. 1 and 2 stands dismissed as not pressed. 5.
The allegation is regarding the accused persons having arrived at the house of the informant, whereafter they had engaged in indiscriminate firing in the air and as far as the petitioner no. 3 and one another co-accused person namely Ghanshyam Pathak are concerned, they have been alleged to have damaged the window of the house of the informant with iron rod.
6.
The learned counsel for the petitioner no. 3 submits that the petitioner no. 3 is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is having a clean antecedent. The learned counsel for the petitioner no. 3 has further submitted that the petitioner no. 3 has not been alleged to have assaulted the informant or any other member of the prosecution party, hence, he is not having any complicity in the matter.
7.
Per contra, the learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
8.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the materials available on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51159 of 2023(2) dt.19-08-2023 3/3 record as also considering the fact that the petitioner no. 3 has not been alleged to have engaged in any sort of overt act and is having a clean antecedent, I deem it fit and appropriate to admit the petitioner no. 3 to the privilege of anticipatory bail. 9.
Accordingly, the petitioner no. 3, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Rosera at Samastipur in connection with Rosera PS case no. 401 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U T