Vikash Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8108 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-330 Year-2020 Thana- JAYNAGAR District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.

VIKASH PASWAN S/O SHATRUGHAN PASWAN @ SATRUDHAN PASWAN RESIDENT OF KAMALA ROAD, P.S. JAYNAGAR, DISTRICT MADHUBANI 2.

RAHUL PASWAN S/O UMESH PASWAN RESIDENT OF KAMALA ROAD, P.S. JAYNAGAR, DISTRICT MADHUBANI 3.

PUJA KUMARI S/O UMESH PASWAN RESIDENT OF KAMALA ROAD, P.S. JAYNAGAR, DISTRICT MADHUBANI 4.

BALRAM PASWAN S/O SATRUGHAN PASWAN @ SATRUDHAN PASWAN RESIDENT OF KAMALA ROAD, P.S. JAYNAGAR, DISTRICT MADHUBANI 5.

BABITA DEVI S/O KUNAL PASWAN RESIDENT OF KAMALA ROAD, P.S. JAYNAGAR, DISTRICT MADHUBANI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ratanakar Jha, advocate For the Informant :

Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP (In-charge) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 07-12-2021 Heard the parties.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Jaynagar P.S. Case No. 330 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 342, 323, 324, 307, 380, 427, 448, 452, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that basically this is a case under Section 307 of the IPC, which has been registered due to land dispute. There is a counter case also

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8108 of 2021(2) dt.07-12-2021 2/3 of the petitioner. The main allegation against Kunal Paswan, who assaulted the victim and not against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that petitioners no. 3 and 5 are female and their names have been given in the F.I.R. and they are not expected to participate in the assault on the prosecution side.

Heard Sri Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned A.P.P. and Sri Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the informant. It is submitted by the prosecution that the prosecution party evidence has come during investigation that the accused person has recorded one of the lady members of the prosecution side while taking bath and because of this, occurrence has taken place and thereafter the accused persons assaulted the victim and other family members and destructed some properties of the prosecution side.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the allegations levelled against the petitioners that they were involved in recording the private moment of one of the family member of the prosecution, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the above named petitioners no. 1 and 2. Their application for anticipatory bail is dismissed. So far as petitioners no. 3, 4 and 5 are concerned, they

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8108 of 2021(2) dt.07-12-2021 3/3 are granted the privilege of anticipatory bail, let above named petitioners no. 3, 4 and 5 in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani in connection with Jaynagar P.S. Case No. 330 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Sandeep Kumar, J) pravinkumar/- U