Binod Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62318 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2021 Thana- DHANGAI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

BINOD KUMAR SINGH Son of Badho Singh Resident of Village- Paraiya, P.S.- Barachatti, District- Gaya.

2.

Mithilesh Singh Son of Ramchandra Singh Resident of Village- Paraiya, P.S.- Barachatti, District- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manish Kumar No.2, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 14-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 325 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that he had given a part of his land for construction of fibre break road but the constructing company had covered more area of his land than what was given to them, accordingly upon objection by the informant all the named accused persons, including the petitioner, came to his house and assaulted the son,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62318 of 2021(2) dt.14-07-2022 2/3 daughter-in-law and nephew of the informant with lathi due to which his son received injury on his head and his nephew sustained injuries on his nose and are under treatment. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case, the present F.I.R. is a counterblast to the F.I.R. instituted by the wife of petitioner no.2 (Annexure-2), it is next submitted that the petitioner is neither contractor nor labour of construction company as such they had no interest in the dispute which occurred between the informant and the construction company. It is further submitted that the allegations are general and omnibus in nature as no specific overt act has been alleged against any of the accused persons.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory 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 the learned court below where

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62318 of 2021(2) dt.14-07-2022 3/3 the case is pending/successor court in connection with Dhangai P.S. Case No. 42 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T