Munchun Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52301 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2023 Thana- ANGARGHAT District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.
Munchun Rai, S/O Dinesh Rai, R/O Village- Mordiwa, Ward No. 7, P.S. Samastipur Muffasil, Dist.- Samastipur 2.
Krishna Rai, S/O Lakhindar Rai, R/O Village- Mordiwa, Ward No. 7, P.S. Samastipur Muffasil, Dist.- Samastipur 3.
Dinesh Rai, S/O Late Shivnandan Rai, R/O Village- Mordiwa, Ward No. 7, P.S. Samastipur Muffasil, Dist. Samastipur 4.
Santosh Rai @ Santosh Kumar Rai, S/O Ganga Prasad Rai, R/O VillageMordiwa, Ward No. 7, PS. Samastipur Muffasil, Dist. Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.cBrajendra Nath Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-08-2023 Heard Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Angarghat P.S. Case No. 36 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 392, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Allegedly while the informant along with his son were going on their motorcycle, in the meantime, all the petitioners, on three motorcycles took over the informant and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52301 of 2023(2) dt.23-08-2023 2/3 his son and on the point of pistol snatched the valuables, including cash of Rs.30,000/-.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that admittedly the occurrence took place on 01.02.2023, for which Complaint case has been filed on 10.02.2023, and thereafter it was sent to the concerned police station under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. for institution of the F.I.R. and the same has been registered on 12.04.2023,. He further submits that petitioner no.1 is non-else, but the son-inlaw of the informant, against whom the daughter of the informant had filed a Complaint case under Sections 498(A) of the Indian penal Code and only with a view to pressurize the petitioners, who are all family members, the present F.I.R. has been instituted. He next submits that in the case instituted by the daughter of the informant, the petitioner no.
1 has been allowed the privilege of anticipatory bail, which caused nuisance to her father and, accordingly, the present Complaint case has been filed to get them in trouble. He lastly submits that all the petitioners are carrying fair antecedent, save and except Mahila P.S. Case No. 99 of 2022, instituted by the daughter of the informant.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52301 of 2023(2) dt.23-08-2023 3/3 opposes the bail application and submits that the petitioners are also involved in one another case instituted by the daughter of the informant.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the relationship of the petitioners with the informant and the delay in lodging of the Complaint/F.I.R., let the petitioners, named above, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dalsinghsarai, Samastipur in connection with Angarghat P.S. Case No. 36 of 2023, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close relative of the petitioners.
(Harish Kumar, J) uday/- U T