Daya Shankar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55582 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-127 Year-2024 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.
Daya Shankar Singh Sonof Late Jag Narayan Chaudhary Resident Of Village -KHANETHI, Police Station- Kargahar District -ROHTAS At Sasaram 2.
Golu @ Kamal Kant Kuamr Sonof Daya Shankar Singh Resident Of Village -KHANETHI, Police Station- Kargahar District -ROHTAS At Sasaram 3.
Krishna @ Krishna Kant Kumar Son Of Daya Shankar Singh Resident Of Village -KHANETHI, Police Station- Kargahar District -ROHTAS At Sasaram 4.
Kanchan Devi Wife Of Daya Shankar Singh Resident Of Village -KHANETHI, Police Station- Kargahar District -ROHTAS At Sasaram ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Raghunandan Kumar Singh For the State :
Mr.Mohammad Sufyan For the Informant :
Bibhuti Narayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 14-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 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 informant's side.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. Petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55582 of 2024(3) dt.14-11-2024 2/2 against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is admitted land dispute between the parties. He submits that the injury sustained by the informant's side is simple in nature, this fact is also substantiated from the case diary. Petitioners have one criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.
5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the injury, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned lower Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No.127 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T